Elahe Tavakoli

what's more, it is exactly the opposite than you originally thought.

Creators of the DOI system recommend/insist not to involve any semantics in DOI formatting. The role of the DOI as an identifier is only identifying but not describing given research work. For a proper description (i.e. resolving metadata by ID) are responsible DOI services. It is enough to enter into an address field of a web browser:

https://doi.org/xxxxx

replacing xxxxx by a given DOI to get know what work it is identifying.

Elahe Tavakoli

there are not strict rules applied uniformly to the whole world of the DOIs.

Please note that there are many different DOI Registration Agencies:

https://www.doi.org/RA_Coverage.html

that form the most upper level of DOIs distribution system. They are responsible for assigning DOI pools for other institutions. E.g. Crossref assigns DOI pools for scholarly publishers. What is happening next is a complete freestyle. The publisher can assign subpools for given Journals or manage DOIs pool by themselves. This leads to many styles of DOIs managing - some involve dates as a part of the DOI other use just plain autoincrements etc.

Maybe, this is useful,doi number js DNA or a fingerprint of an article.

Thanks so much, but I assumed there is more specific clearer association between every digit and the features of the publication.

Elahe Tavakoli

what's more, it is exactly the opposite than you originally thought.

Creators of the DOI system recommend/insist not to involve any semantics in DOI formatting. The role of the DOI as an identifier is only identifying but not describing given research work. For a proper description (i.e. resolving metadata by ID) are responsible DOI services. It is enough to enter into an address field of a web browser:

https://doi.org/xxxxx

replacing xxxxx by a given DOI to get know what work it is identifying.

Good information!

Following