W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > March 2013

Re: ORCID no longer relevant?

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2013 11:26:28 -0400
Message-ID: <513F4924.7090304@openlinksw.com>
To: public-lod@w3.org
On 3/12/13 11:18 AM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
> On 3/12/13 10:57 AM, Jonathan A Rees wrote:
>> Remember it took a while for DOIs to become linked-data-friendly.
>> I suspect ORCID has limited staff that is swamped with work and LD is 
>> not a priority for them.
>> I say give them a year or two to get up to speed and in the meantime 
>> continue to submit bug reports.
>>
>> It's not clear to me whether they identify profiles or people (or 
>> something else). Might be a good idea to figure that out before using 
>> the URIs in RDF.
>
> Jonathan,
>
> From the ORCID web site [1]:
>
> "ORCID is an open, non-profit, community-based effort to create and 
> maintain a registry of unique researcher identifiers and a transparent 
> method of linking research activities and outputs to these identifiers. "
>
> Based on the above, one can safely assume that an IRI that denotes a 
> entity of type foaf:Person would apply. In addition, a profile 
> document (denoted with its own URI-URL) i.e., entity of type 
> foaf:PersonalProfileDocument would then be used to describe the 
> aforementioned foaf:Person entity.
>
> ## Turtle ##
>
> ## which can be saved to a file and published to a Web accessible 
> location ##
>
> @prefix foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/> .
>
> <>
> a foaf:PersonalProfileDocument ;
> foaf:topic <#ResearcherX> .
>
> <#ResearcherX>
> a foaf:Person;
> foaf:made <#ResearchItemX>, <#ResearchItemY>, <#ResearchItemZ>.
>
> ## End ##
>
>
> Links:
>
> [1] http://about.orcid.org/about/what-is-orcid -- ORID about page.
>
> Kingsley

To be a little more precise:


## Turtle ##

## which can be saved to a file and published to a Web accessible 
location ##

## used foaf:primaryTopic instead of the less precise foaf:topic .

@prefix foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/> .

<>
a foaf:PersonalProfileDocument ;
foaf:primaryTopic <#ResearcherX> .

<#ResearcherX>
a foaf:Person;
foaf:made <#ResearchItemX>, <#ResearchItemY>, <#ResearchItemZ>.

## End ##


Kingsley
>
>>
>> Jonathan
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 7:21 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes 
>> <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk 
>> <mailto: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
>>     <http://orcid.org> itself)
>>
>>
>>     Another issue is that there is actually no RDF exposed from
>>     orcid.org <http://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/3641532
>>     [3]
>>     http://support.orcid.org/knowledgebase/articles/116780-structure-of-the-orcid-identifier
>>     [4]
>>     http://support.orcid.org/forums/175591-orcid-ideas-forum/suggestions/3283848
>>     [5]
>>     http://support.orcid.org/forums/175591-orcid-ideas-forum/suggestions/3291844
>>
>>
>>     --
>>     Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team
>>     School of Computer Science
>>     The University of Manchester
>>
>>
>
>
> -- 
>
> Regards,
>
> Kingsley Idehen	
> Founder & CEO
> OpenLink Software
> Company Web:http://www.openlinksw.com
> Personal Weblog:http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
> Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
> Google+ Profile:https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
> LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
>
>
>
>


-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen







Received on Tuesday, 12 March 2013 15:26:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:16:30 UTC