- From: John Erickson <olyerickson@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2013 08:06:23 -0400
- To: Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
- Cc: public-lod@w3.org
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/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 > -- 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 12:06:54 UTC