Open cbroschinski opened 6 years ago
Yes, there is a problem that not all publishers shared licensing metadata for the whole period with Crossref. I discussed it in the long-form documentation saying:
Notice that it is very likely that the overall decrease of spending for hybrid
open access reported to the Open APC initiative in 2017 is due to a lag
between the time that payments were made and expenditures were reported to the
initiative. Comparing the number of articles found via Open APC and Crossref,
furthermore suggests that not all publishers share licensing metadata
retrospectively. Take for instance journals published by Springer Nature:
between 2013 and 2015 more open access articles were reported to the Open APC
initiative than registered with an open license via Crossref (see Figure 2).
So, publishers not only need to make sure to tag current hybrid open access articles, but also need to update metadata for already published content.
this will be checked in more detail in #53 I think. Otherwise this can closed, I think?
Just for clarification: There are cases where the article count in OpenAPC is larger than the count reported by the monitor (Wiley-Blackwell 2014/15 or SpringerNature 2015). This means that your API calls could not identfiy those missing articles as hybrid OA in crossref because they are not correctly tagged with a CC license in license_ref, correct?