In an ongoing effort to make more of our operations transparent, we have decided to start sharing summaries of our board meetings on the blog. We already post our board resolutions, but the summaries will give a bit more information on what the board discusses that may or may not show up on the list of resolutions.
A couple of months ago, Ludo Waltman and André Brasil raised some questions about good practices for Crossref DOI registration, asking for input from the scholarly communication community. In this post, Ludo and André reflect on the input received and discuss the approach to DOI registration that the MetaROR publish-review-curate platform is going to take.
Click here for the translation in Bahasa Indonesia
As Crossref celebrated its 25th anniversary last year, we are highlighting some of the most active and engaged regions in our global community.
Over the past 25 years, the makeup of Crossref membership has evolved significantly; founded by a handful of large publishers, we now have more than 24,000 members representing 165 countries. Nearly two-thirds of them self-identify as universities, libraries, government agencies, foundations, scholar publishers, and research institutions.
It’s been said that Americans are unusual in tending to ask “Where do you work?” as an initial question upon introduction to a new acquaintance, indicating a perhaps unhealthy preoccupation with work as identity. But in the context of published research, “What is this author’s affiliation?” is a question of global importance that goes beyond just wanting to know the name – and perhaps prestige level – of the place a researcher works.
Each bore a token from the comet: a shard of its dark crystal fused into their palms. The shard's presence anchored them to time; for each, the world’s erasure left a scar only they could see. The shards bound them to one another, whispering in a chorus that sounded suspiciously like hope.
