Dear Anurag Acharya,

I very much appreciate your itemized response and helpful notes. I wish Google Scholar to become Number 1 Choice for scholars' integrated search for quality science info. Your response adds to my confidence that this will be the case. This is why I attempt to make my peers know and use the Google Scholar. Thank you very much.

I feel obliged to send this email to co-recipients of my original inquiry.

Sincerely,

Alexei Koudinov, MD, PhD
<http://neurobiologyoflipids.org/myjournalindex.html>Neurobiology of Lipids,
<http://dopingjournal.org/mydopingjindex.html>Doping Journa<http://dopingjournal.org/mydopingjindex.html>l

----------------------------------------------------------------
To: alexeikoudinov[at]neurobiologyoflipids.org
Subject: Re: FW: Google Scholar to Integrate with NIH PubMed Central (a dream)
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 23:20:44 -0800
From: Anurag Acharya <acha[at]google.com>

Dear Prof Koudinov: your message [AK: SOAF post <https://arl.org/Lists/SPARC-OAForum/Message/1686.html> ] was forwarded to me. Thanks for your detailed message.

The main reason for using DOIs is their permanence and the redirecting service which allows users to find the current location of the
work. This allows a search index to continue directing users even if the actual location of the article has changed.  Of course, DOIs are not the only persistent identifiers. As you mention, PMIDs are another important class. Accordingly, we use PMIDs the same way as DOIs. As you may have heard, we recently started a pilot for facilitating institutional access at library. This pilot uses DOIs as well as PMIDs for identifying articles.

>According to the quoted above CrossRef latest newsletter, "The CrossRef
>Search Committee is also continuing discussions with Google on a number of
>technical issues, such as making sure coverage of CrossRef member content is
>complete and crawling of content is as efficient as possible."

Our goal is to achieve excellent coverage for all scholarly content regardless of its source. For some sources, this is already in place;
for others, we are working on improving coverage. Today you can find articles from all classes of sources in Google Scholar.

>1. You have to know that of one thousand and a half scholar serials indexed
>in The  <http://www.doaj.org/> Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
><http://www.doaj.org/> , great number of titles provide article level meta
>data with unique DOAJ identities and links to free access articles' full
>text at the Publishers' web sites.

AFAIK, we crawl all of these. Updates to the index may take a while (the service is still fairly new).

>2. Another major possibility is to link Life Sciences Google article indices
>to articles archive in NIH PubMed Central (PMC, a free archive of life
>science literature backed by National Library of Medicine and by the
>National Institues of Health, the major US funding agency of quality Life
>Sciences research) and/or PubMed/Medline (a truly major source for any life
>science researcher, health care provider and lay person seeking quality
>scholar health info).

We include articles from pubmedcentral as well. Plus we include all the article abstracts from pubmed.

>I hope that after reading quoted above materials on NIH Public Access Plan
>you will come to realize that the time is right for Google to seek
>collaboration with NIH.

We have been working with NIH for close to two years now. We view this as
an important relationship, I believe NIH feels the same way.

To summarize, our goal is to index all scholarly literature irrespective of the source. I and my colleagues really want to build the best search over scholarly content and are willing to work with all parties to make this happen.

anurag