My experience is that to create a DOI you need to provide a basic
level of metadata for each item rather than simply registering a
target URL - I'm not sure how curated this needs to be, and it can
probably be autogenerated, but there might be problems scaling it and
doing it on demand. There is also a short delay before they become
active at the central registry. (I've certainly seen cases where a
publisher has issued a DOI then announced it to the world before
CrossRef are able to resolve it, and it takes a day or two before the
DOI works...)
As a result, I don't think we could generate these on the fly and use
a URL-shortener type approach - there might be problems with
generating that many of them, and they would not reliably work at the
moment they're generated.
Andrew.
On 30 December 2014 at 21:53, Andy Mabbett <andy(a)pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote:
Digital object identifiers are an international
standard for document
identification:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_object_identifier
The WMF could be a DOI registrant, and resolve DOIs in the form
10.NNNN.Qnnnnn for Wikidata items, or, say, 10.NNNN.en:609232908 for:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_King_of_Rome&oldid=60923…
Where 's the best on-wiki (Meta?) place to propose this?
--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
--
- Andrew Gray
andrew.gray(a)dunelm.org.uk