Why do citations still need to have archaic abbreviated formats like J. Anal. Chem. (27)314, p5483-5489 when we could just all agree to use DOI numbers instead? First author, year, DOI would be way simpler, I think.
@invaderxan loads of stuff don’t have DOI though.
I’m thinking about every article that instead has ISSN ####-####.
There are a LOT of articles in EdTech coming from Turkey (as an example) that do not have DOI.
A fair point. I'll admit, I'm biased working in physics where everything has a DOI.
But seeing as everything is digitally catalogued somewhere, it would make things a lot easier if we could simply use those catalogue numbers. I see no trouble with using a combination of DOI/ISSN/ISBN/any other where available. It's a string of forgettable characters which no one really reads either way.
@invaderxan I totally agree, I think a unified system for simplified documentation would be incredible!
@invaderxan Referencing journal / publication names give the benefit also of credibility - not necessarily of huge benefit for someone out of a field, but if I know what a specific bent / focus of a journal is, this does help me in decision making to spend time to read or not.
@invaderxan In my field we use the full name. Paper is cheap, bits are even cheaper, and abbreviations are a barrier to access (knowing them is 'hidden knowledge' passed from teacher to student within a community). There are many problems with DOIs, like proprietary journals which 'helpfully' provide a DOI for their paywalled version not the open one you can get elsewhere.
Scholar Social is a microblogging platform for researchers, grad students, librarians, archivists, undergrads, academically inclined high schoolers, educators of all levels, journal editors, research assistants, professors, administrators—anyone involved in academia who is willing to engage with others respectfully. Read more ...