Re: Call for comment: <draft-iab-doi-04.txt> (Assigning Digital Object I

Hi,

On 7/2/15 4:34 PM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> > At negligible cost.
> How much? I don't remember having seen the actual cost mentioned
> anywhere. And, as John Klensin noticed here, the agreement between the
> RFC editor and the FIFA of DOI is secret.
From the draft:

>    The
>    prices are fairly low, on the order of $660/year for membership, 15
>    cents per document deposit fees for a bulk upload of the backfile
>    (the existing RFCs), and $1/per document to deposit them as they are
>    published.
And to John's other point:

> Other than the "eat your own dogfood" principle, it unclear to
> me that any particular one of them is a clear choice.  Maybe the
> choice of DOIs is more or less arbitrary or reflects a
> too-narrow community of discussion (raising, again, the question
> of why the community is being asked only now).  But, if this is
> going to be posted as an IAB document, I think the IAB is
> obligated to explain the decision, rather than putting up a
> document that strongly implies that DOIs are the only plausible
> choice.  
There's a reason why the IAB is vested with this responsibility.  A
bunch of engineers who know absolutely nothing about the publishing
industry and seemingly little about academia shouldn't make this
decision.  The professional the IAB hired made a recommendation based on
a lot of discussion with a lot of people.  Please let's make a mole hill
out of a mole hill, for once.

Eliot

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature