The following models each describe a “notification” between a repository and a journal system. One component which is common to all is the URI called URI-P. This URI identifies a resource in the repository (typically a preprint). For the purpose of these models, it is assumed that both metadata and the actual manuscript may be retrieved by a remote system (e.g. the journal) by visiting URI-P and from there, for example, follow HTTP Link Headers that convey the necessary information, as outlined in the Signposting concept. In the model presented below, the request for review is initiated by the author, through the repository. However, we also envision an alternative use case in which the request for review is initiated by a peer review service that has identified a preprint or article which would be of interest.
Notification 1: Request for review initiated via repository
A preprint manuscript and associated metadata have been deposited in a repository by an author. The author has requested that the preprint be reviewed by a journal for possible publication there. Overlay peer review and other services available to authors and the repositories would be listed in a registry/directory that could be accessed in an automated way via the repository interface.
The acknowledgement notification (LDN-A), while not entirely necessary, can be a highly useful response to let the repository and author know that their request for review is being considered.
Notification 2: Outcome of review
The journal has reviewed a submission from the repository, and wishes to inform the submitting repository of the result.
Notification 3: General update
The journal is already aware of a preprint identified by URI-P and held in the repository. The journal wishes to notify the repository that it has new information about the preprint, for example that the preprint has now been reviewed, will be published, and now has a PID for the version of record which may be added to the metadata record associated with URI-P, held in the repository.