Dear @ajnyga
Thank you for sharing this plugin with us.
I installed it on two OMP 3.3.8 sites. One of the sites gave a 504 gateway timeout, and I couldn’t reach the plugin interface (to enter the username & password, and to deposit a book doi). On the other site, I entered a valid CrossRef username and password. But I get the following error message when I tried to deposit a doi. Hope, this may help to improve the plugin,
I noticed that the orcid id information is located within the person name tag.
Regards,
##<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<doi_batch_diagnostic status="completed" sp="a-cs1">
<submission_id>1435065238</submission_id>
<batch_id>_20221225193122000</batch_id>
<record_diagnostic status="Failure">
<doi />
<msg>Error: cvc-datatype-valid.1.2.1: '' is not a valid value for 'NMTOKEN'.
Error: cvc-attribute.3: The value '' of attribute 'language' on element 'book_metadata' is not valid with respect to its type, 'null'.
Error: cvc-complex-type.2.4.a: Invalid content was found starting with element 'ORCID'. One of '{"http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.4.2":given_name, "http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.4.2":surname}' is expected.
</msg>
</record_diagnostic>
<batch_data>
<record_count>1</record_count>
<success_count>0</success_count>
<warning_count>0</warning_count>
<failure_count>1</failure_count>
</batch_data>
</doi_batch_diagnostic>
(403 Forbidden)##
Hard to say what is wrong in the first case, would need to see a php error for that.
Error: cvc-attribute.3: The value '' of attribute 'language' on element 'book_metadata' is not valid with respect to its type, 'null'.
What is the language of the publication? The language attribute mentioned there is set with PKPLocale::getIso1FromLocale($locale) so it seems like whatever the locale is that function is returning null.
Error: cvc-complex-type.2.4.a: Invalid content was found starting with element 'ORCID'. One of '{"http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.4.2":given_name, "http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.4.2":surname}' is expected.
This is probably because there is no author name available and Crossref is expecting to see that data before ORCID. I am not sure if it is possible to register content without an author name.
First, thanks so much for sharing your plugin!
The Datacite plugin is now part of the plugin gallery. Would it be possible to integrate your code to that plugin, so we maximize future compatibility efforts? Have you suggested this to @Dulip_Withanage?
Thanks again!
Thank you @ajnyga for developing this and the other handy plugins for OMP! They will have a massive impact on our workflow.
When I tested it for anthologies, the Crossref XML Plugin seem to be putting both volume editors and chapter authors in the main tag (under <book_metadata> or <book_series_metadata>). I expected it to be only editors in this tag, and then the chapter authors in the tag for each chapter. So now the chapter authors appear twice in the XML.
I’m not sure if it’s due to the plugin or the way we’ve entered the metadata. Any comments on this would be appreciated
Did you check what the Crossref guidelines say about this? In case it is not according to their guidelines, let’s change that in the plugin. It does sound like that is a mistake.
oh, I think the problem here is of course that in OMP editors and chapter authors are basically the same role. You can not distinquish between them because “Editor” and “Author” there are just labels which any publisher can edit.
@asmecher this is a similar problem as we have with translators vs. authors. We would really need more defined contributor data in the applications. I am not sure if CREDIT would solve this problem either like it does not solve the translators vs authors problem.
But your plugin can distinguish between them, in the XML output I get either “editor” and “author” as values in the contributor_role attribute. I’m guessing it gets the editor role from the check box " Identify this contributor as the editor of this volume." instead of from the selected role then perhaps?
Regarding the Crossref guidelines they actually seem to imply that chapter authors should be in both contributor tags. But I don’t think it’s entirely clear, and the examples from Crossref do not really make sense to me. https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/markup-guide-record-types/books-and-chapters/. I’ve reached out to Crossref for clarification, will post here as soon as I get a response.
Just received word from the support at Crossref. They admitted that the information on their web was unclear but told me that the my interpretation was correct, editors should be in the book metadata, chapter authors in each individual article.
The way I distinguish between the contributors now is that I check which contributors are attached to chapters.
Like I mentioned, in the user permission level both chapters authors and volume editors are ROLE_ID_AUTHOR (a constant used in the code) so we can not use the roles to distinguish the difference. Of course the labels for the roles are different, but since they are editable, those can not be used either because if a press would edit the label, the plugin would not work as expected.
Of course I could just add the contributors to the book level in cases where they are not mentioned as chapter authors. But that would not work in situations where the volume editor is also selected to be the author of a chapter, which is also very likely.
So to be honest, I do not have an easy fix for this.
Edit: just to add a screencapture of the current roles in OMP regarding this issue. Author in the permission level column means that in code level these roles are identical and we can not distinguish between them. Like I mentioned, this is also a problem with Translators.
In my opinion the problem comes from the situation where we try to use the same taxonomy for defining user rights within the system (applies to the users table) and contributors roles (applies to the authors table). These should be separate.
Either way it’s not a huge problem, we can simply export the XML files and clean them and upload manually to Crossref in the meantime. It’s still way better than the solution I was using before. So thank you once again for the great work!
I’m also wondering if the plugin can handle CC-license metadata. It doesn’t seem to include any license from my testing, so once again I’m wondering if it’s the plugin or our metadata that could be the problem.
