Participation Report - Text Mining URLs

Hi everyone!

I’m having troubles to improve the score of Text Mining URLs at Participation Report.

I understand that I have to deposit the Full Text URLs and I have been doing it via Metadata Manager, however, my score is still 0% :frowning:

What am I possibly doing wrong?

Hi @BrunaErlandsson,

Thanks for this message. I’d like to look into the specifics here. Do you have an example DOI or two you can share with me so I can investigate?


1 Like

Yes, sure!

Check this journal named ESTIMA, for example (

I’ve been depositing their DOIs with Metadata Manager this year, so any DOI for the current year can be used as an example…

Here is one:

Let me know if I can help with more details!

Hi Bruna,

Thanks for this example. I’m investigating. I should have an update for you later today.


1 Like

Hi @BrunaErlandsson,

It looks like the tdm URLs that you are including in your Metadata Manager submissions are in the metadata record for that example DOI 10.30886/estima.v16.666_PT, as you can see here:

<ai:license_ref applies_to="tdm" start_date="2019-04-22">


That’s good news! Now, I’ll need to check to see why this isn’t being updated in your Participation Reports. More investigations for next week.

Apologies for the slow turnaround on this one,

1 Like

Hi @BrunaErlandsson. I haven’t forgotten about your request. My investigation here is just taking longer than I expected. I hope to have a definitive answer for you very soon.


1 Like

Hello again, Bruna,

What you have included in Metadata Manager is the URL where users can retrieve the license that pertains to the text and data mining. The “Text Mining URLs” section of our Participation Reports measure something related, but a little different - the full text URLs where that text and data can be mined. You can find more about the difference between the two and instructions on how to provide the full text mining URLs via XML here:

To support text and data mining, publishers need to update their metadata to include full text URI(s) for each piece of content with a DOI. Anybody using the CrossRef Metadata API to query a CrossRef DOI will be able to retrieve these URLs and follow them directly to the full text. Publishers who want to be able to support multiple “representations” of the full text of the article will be able to do so. So, for instance, they could support the delivery of either PDF, XML or HTML, or just one of these formats.

Included in that link I provided are two XML sample files which you can follow to submit your full text mining URLs.

Please let me know how I can help,

1 Like

@ifarley, thank you for dedicating your time to this.

I will also have to dedicate some time to understand it fully and then I let you know if I didn’t understand any details :slight_smile:

Thanks, thanks!

1 Like

Yes, please let me know if you have questions. We’re always happy to help!


We are also not able to see the progress % in participation report. our prefix 5859, could you please check and suggest where are the gaps?

We are getting the resolution reports every month and not getting the participation report.

Do we have any specific DTD for XML to record in the participation report?

Please have a quick check and confirm.

Hello @SharibAsrar ,

Thanks for your message. Your DOI prefix must begin with 10. , so, unfortunately, 5859 is not your DOI prefix. I checked to see if maybe your prefix was 10.5859? That DOI prefix is associated with the member The Korean Association of Information Systems, as you can see here:

Are you inquiring about the The Korean Association of Information Systems and the percentages in that participation report?