Clearify DOIs, Handles, Persistent Identifier
Unfortunately, it seems unclear whether DOIs are also allowed in the context of iFDOs. Example fields: image-set-handle, image-handle.
Solution:
- Create awareness, be more specific.
Suggestion:
- Rename handle to persistent identifier (pid) in the keys, i.e., image-set-pid (instead of image-set-handle).
- Specify in the description that these fields are for persistent identifiers, like DOIs and handles.
Activity
assigned to @kheger
We had this discussion an decided for "image-(set-)handle" as a generic term. image-pid was "too unspecific" (could mean ORCID for people or ROR for institutes as well). image-doi was "too specific".
As all DOIs are also handles (the DOI system uses the handle system software!), it is absolutely fine to write DOIs into the image-(set-)handle fields.
This still needs to be made clear in the online documentation!
'As all DOIs are also handles (the DOI system uses the handle system software!), it is absolutely fine to write DOIs into the image-(set-)handle fields.'
Unfortunately, it does not seem to be so simple.
'It is sometimes asked: “If the DOI system is based on the Handle System, why not cut out the middleman and use handles alone?” The answer is simple: “DOI® names are more than handles”.' [https://www.doi.org/the-identifier/resources/factsheets/doi-system-and-the-handle-system]
I just had a complaint that we write PANGAEA DOIs for datasets in the image-set-handle field, thus an indirect request for better differentiation of terminology.