If multiple ISSNs/ISBNs make it possible to distinguish between printed and online media

[georgesimeo]

A different ISSN from the print edition (the e-ISSN) is used for the electronic / online edition of the journal. This is could allow librarians and other users to distinguish between their print and online holdings.

In schema for an example if we have more than one ISSN, this could be specified as dc.identifier.issn.printed: 1412-033X (printed edition) dc.identifier.issn.electronic: 2085-4722 (electronic edition)

[jmvezic]

This has been open for a while, but I want to throw in my two cents. While ISSN does indeed have two versions (e-ISSN and ISSN), ISBN is assigned for every format a book has, not just "online" and "print". In fact, such distinctions should be avoided. Instead, ISBN should be marked with a specific format to which it relates. For example, ISBN (PDF), ISBN (epub), ISBN (audiobook), ISBN (hardcover), ISBN (paperback).

[ACz-UniBi]

Dear @jmvezic , thank you for your comment. Indeed, the ISBN and ISSN seem to be equivalent. However, my experience is that a DOI could be used in an e-journal for an article and the same DOI is used for the same article in a print-journal.

I don't see this similar for chapters/sections in books.

Do you? Could you point out/link to some cases?

Thanks in advance, Andreas

[jmvezic]

Hi @ACz-UniBi, what I meant is ISBN mandates a different kind of distinction regarding formats. If your book or conference proceeding is published as: hardcover, paperback, PDF, ePUB, HTML, etc., then all of those formats must have a different ISBN.

DOI is fine as it is, just like you said.