- From: Dawson, Laura <Laura.Dawson@bowker.com>
- Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2013 09:24:53 -0400
- To: John Erickson <olyerickson@gmail.com>, Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
- CC: "public-lod@w3.org" <public-lod@w3.org>
Stian, whatever you discover, I'd be interested to know - ORCID numbers are a subset of ISNI, and I'm on the ISNI board of directors. We'd want to work in parallel. On 3/12/13 8:06 AM, "John Erickson" <olyerickson@gmail.com> wrote: >Regarding the specific question of the orcid.org proxy returning >correct http conneg results --- a must in order to be linked data >"savvy" --- a couple years ago a similar observation was made of >crossref.org and they remedied the situation nicely. > >Since a few of the people involved in ORCID ><http://orcid.org/about/team> are familiar with the CrossRef.org >situation, maybe a similar result can happen? > >John > >On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 7:21 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes ><soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk> wrote: >> In my projects, we have been wanting to recommend using ORCID [1] as >> part of identifying authors and contributors. ORCID is receiving >> increasing attention in the scientific publishing community as it >> promises a unified way to identify authors of scientific publications. >> >> >> I was going to include an ex:orcid property on foaf:Agents in our >> specifications, perhaps as an owl:sameAs subproperty (I know, I >> know!). >> >> There's no official property for linking to a ORCID profile at the >> moment [5] - I would be careful about using foaf:account to the ORCID >> URI, as the ORCID identifies the person (at least in a scientific >> context), and not an OnlineAccount - has someone else tried a >> structure here? >> >> >> >> There are other long-standing issues in using ORCID in Linked Data: >> >> >> For one, the URI to use is unclear [2], but the form >> <http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718> is what is currently being >> promoted [3]: >> >>> The ORCID iD should always be expressed and stored as a URI: >>>http://orcid.org/xxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxx (with the protocol (http://), and >>>with hyphens in the number xxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxx). >> >> (Strangely this advise is not reflected on orcid.org itself) >> >> >> Another issue is that there is actually no RDF exposed from orcid.org >>[4]. >> >> >> But the last issue is that if you request the ORCID URI with Accept: >> application/rdf+xml - then the REST API wrongly returns its own XML >> format - but still claims Content-Type application/rdf+xml. The issue >> for this [5] has just been postponed 'for several months', even though >> it should be a simple fix. >> >> >> This raises the question if ORCIDs would still be relevant on the >> semantic web. Does anyone else have views, alternatives or >> suggestions? >> >> >> >> [1] http://orcid.org/ >> [2] >>http://support.orcid.org/forums/175591-orcid-ideas-forum/suggestions/3641 >>532 >> [3] >>http://support.orcid.org/knowledgebase/articles/116780-structure-of-the-o >>rcid-identifier >> [4] >>http://support.orcid.org/forums/175591-orcid-ideas-forum/suggestions/3283 >>848 >> [5] >>http://support.orcid.org/forums/175591-orcid-ideas-forum/suggestions/3291 >>844 >> >> >> -- >> Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team >> School of Computer Science >> The University of Manchester >> > > > >-- >John S. Erickson, Ph.D. >Director, Web Science Operations >Tetherless World Constellation (RPI) ><http://tw.rpi.edu> <olyerickson@gmail.com> >Twitter & Skype: olyerickson > >
Received on Tuesday, 12 March 2013 13:25:30 UTC