For people wanting to include URL references in things like books, what’s the right approach to take today?
I’m genuinely asking. It seems like its hard to trust that any service will remaining running for decades
I’m genuinely asking. It seems like its hard to trust that any service will remaining running for decades
It is built for the task, and assuming worse case scenario of sunset, it would be ingested into the Wayback Machine. Note that both the Internet Archive and Cloudflare are supporting partners (bottom of page).
(https://doi.org/ is also an option, but not as accessible to a casual user; the DOI Foundation pointed me to https://www.crossref.org/ for adhoc DOI registration, although I have not had time to research further)
other readers may be specifically interested in their contingency plan
This is distinct from Google saying "bye y'all, no more GETs for you" with no other way to access the data.
That’s not to say that DOIs aren’t registered for all kinds of urls. I found the likes of YouTube etc when I researched this about 10 years ago.
Crossref isn’t the only DOI registration agency. DataCite may be more relevant, although both require membership. Part of this is the commitment to maintaining the content.
You could look at Figshare or Zenodo? https://docs.github.com/en/repositories/archiving-a-github-r...
Then Rogue Scholar is worth a mention. https://rogue-scholar.org/
Sorry that doesn’t answer your question but maybe that’s a clue that DOIs might not be right for your use case?
Until the Cocos Islands are annexed by Australia.
You aren't responsible if things go offline. No more than if a publisher stops reprinting books and the library copies all get eaten by rats.
A reader can assess the URl for trustworthiness (is it scam.biz or legitimate_news.com) look at the path to hazard a guess at the metadata and contents, and - finally - look it up in an archive.
I thought that was the standard in academia? I've had reviewers chastise me when I did not use wayback machine to archive a citation and link to that since listing a "date retrieved" doesn't do jack if there's no IA copy.
Short links were usually in addition to full URLS, and more in conference presentations than the papers themselves.
We’ve learned over the years that they can be unreliable, security risks, etc.
I just don’t see a major use-case for them anymore.
Say the interview of a person, a niche publication, a local pamphlet?
Maybe to certify that your article is of a certain level of credibility you need to manually preserve all the cited works yourself in an approved way.