Can’t believe they don’t link to the actual paper: https://academic.oup.com/pasj/advance-article/doi/10.1093/pa...
replies(4):
It links to a doi.org URL which directs the browser to what you linked.
> The DOI for a document remains fixed over the lifetime of the document, whereas its location and other metadata may change. Referring to an online document by its DOI should provide a more stable link than directly using its URL. But if its URL changes, the publisher must update the metadata for the DOI to maintain the link to the URL. It is the publisher's responsibility to update the DOI database. If they fail to do so, the DOI resolves to a dead link, leaving the DOI useless.
More about it at Digital Object Identifier (DOI) Under the Context of Research Data Librarianship - https://doi.org/10.7191%2Fjeslib.2021.1180
which reminds me, who has control over DOI.org ... eg. is it DOGE-safe ? likewise arXiv .. can it easily be co-opted / subsumed ?
It’s an independent foundation and they have backups/contingency plans established with major universities to preserve the DOI records in the event the foundation fails.
DOI must die
But magnet links and the BitTorrent mainline hash-table are a better DOI than DOI.
* An auto increment ID is just as human non-readable as a UUID, it's just easier to get silent collisions from typos.
* The Source is metadata that belongs in a metadata system, not into the ID itself
* the veracity is worthless without verifiability
* gated-ness is just an anti-feature caused by the lack of verifiability
If you you classify identifiers along different axis of their properties, you'll notice that DOIs actually inhabit the completely wrong quadrant for their use-case. (https://docs.rs/tribles/0.5.1/tribles/id/index.html)