EPrints Technical Mailing List Archive
Message: #07394
< Previous (by date) | Next (by date) > | < Previous (in thread) | Next (in thread) > | Messages - Most Recent First | Threads - Most Recent First
Re: [EP-tech] ORCID Support Advance Update
- To: <eprints-tech@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Subject: Re: [EP-tech] ORCID Support Advance Update
- From: Will Fyson <R.W.Fyson@soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2018 11:03:07 +0100
That's correct - the ORCID Support
Advance plugin wouldn't delete any ORCIDs once the circumstances
described in your email below are met. However, as I mentioned in
my previous email, the Advance plugin won't delete automatically
anyway as this functionality is disabled by default, but it would
stop you from editing the ORCIDs by making the field read-only.
With regards to permissions, these are decided by the user when they're connecting their repository account to their ORCID account. The user is given the option to select if they want the repository to be able to "Create and update activities on your ORCID record" and to be able to "Retrieve restricted details from your ORCID record". Many thanks, Will From: Tomasz Neugebauer [Tomasz.Neugebauer@concordia.ca] Sent: 02 August 2018 22:01 To: Eprints-tech Subject: Re: [EP-tech] ORCID Support Advance Update Thank
you for this useful information, I really appreciate it! If
I understand correctly, then, in order not to lose the ORCIDs
for authors collected through ORCID Support plugin, we would
have to do the following: ·
Ensure
that every ORCID in an author field matched on the email field
with a user profile record. This would require adding the
ORCID id to user profiles and/or the email address to the
author field whenever ORCID is included. If
that is done, then the ORCID Support Advance plugin will not
delete any of these ORCIDs, right? What sorts of permissions
will it assign to them? Best
wishes, Tomasz Thank
you also to Will, Jan and John for the broader discussion
about ORCID IDs that I do believe we need (https://twitter.com/photomediathink/status/1012051960676212738).
If we are going to promote ORCID, it has to make sense as a
system. If we can only refer to ORCID IDs of authors who have
an account on our IR, then we would need another global
identifier for the other authors that we can’t use an ORCID
for. From: eprints-tech-bounces@ecs.soton.ac.uk
<eprints-tech-bounces@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
On Behalf Of John Salter Hi Will, Thanks for that clarification - I was a bit
worried there for a moment! I think the ORCID landscape is shifting from a
'get people to sign up for an ORCID' to 'sharing the data
sensibly/properly'. We are a key part of that! Cheers, John From:
eprints-tech-bounces@ecs.soton.ac.uk [mailto:eprints-tech-bounces@ecs.soton.ac.uk]
On Behalf Of Will Fyson Apologies, my previous email was a little bit
flippant on this issue! I agree we need to try and store
authenticated ORCIDs wherever possible. To that end we're
working on adding an annotation system so that where an
ORCID is imported from a trustworthy upstream system, this
bit of provenance is stored and we know not to try and check
this ORCID against a user account.
From: John Salter [J.Salter@leeds.ac.uk]
Sent: 02 August 2018 11:32 To: Eprints-tech Subject:
Re: [EP-tech] ORCID Support Advance Update
> This naturally
poses a problem for storing ORCIDs for external authors, but
in my experience most repositories are happy storing ORCIDs
for just their own users. This concerns me. We (repository developers)
shouldn't be encouraging a blinkered approach to ORCIDs (or
other persistent identifiers). You wouldn't exclude a DOI for a paper if it
wasn't minted by your institution - so why would you choose to
discard ORCIDs for non-local members? If the ORCID has come from a trustworthy upstream
system (e.g. CrossRef, PubsRouter), then the ORCID should stay
with the author. Local ORCIDs can supplement this data - so a
record harvested from your repository is 'improved'. I was reading this:
https://support.crossref.org/hc/en-us/articles/214567746-Authors-and-editors recently - and wondering what the
'authenticated="true"' attribute actually meant - and how the
this assertion should be passed between systems. If a *trusted* upstream system states that
an ORCID is authenticated - can we as a consumer of that data
also state that the ORCID is authenticated when relaying data
from our system? The ORCIDs should be seen as an 'additive' set of
data - if your system can state that an author now has an
ORCID - do it. Just don't throw away data that already exists
for non-local authors. Cheers, John From:
eprints-tech-bounces@ecs.soton.ac.uk [mailto:eprints-tech-bounces@ecs.soton.ac.uk]
On Behalf Of Will Fyson Hi Tomasz,
From: Tomasz Neugebauer [Tomasz.Neugebauer@concordia.ca]
Sent: 01 August 2018 17:50 To: Eprints-tech Subject:
Re: [EP-tech] ORCID Support Advance Update
Hi everyone who has installed the ORCID Support
Advance plugin, Will… I am still looking to get a clearer picture of
what I can expect to happen when I install the ORCID Support
Advance plugin on top of the ORCID Support plugin that we
currently have working. What will happen to the ORCID ID’s that we have
already collected in the author field of publications? The description from Will below about ORCIDs from
a DOI import says this: “, the ORCID field uses
the creator/editor 'Email' column to lookup user profiles in
the repository that have connected to orcid.org so that the
creator/editor ORCID field can be verified. As such any ORCID
added via a DOI import, might then be erased if the user
profile lookup cannot be made. “ Does the above also apply to any ORCIDs that we
have been collecting using the ORCID Support plugin? I don’t think that our depositors have been
diligently filling in the email column in the author field
during the deposit process, does that mean that the user
profile lookup will fail and the ORCID will be deleted for any
author that doesn’t have an email listed in the author
column?
When does this deletion happen, during indexing?
Is there any way to prevent it from happening? Thanks so much for any insight or advice on this
is really appreciated. Tomasz From:
eprints-tech-bounces@ecs.soton.ac.uk
<eprints-tech-bounces@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
On Behalf Of Will Fyson Hi Everyone,
*** Options: http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/eprints-tech *** Archive: http://www.eprints.org/tech.php/ *** EPrints community wiki: http://wiki.eprints.org/ *** EPrints developers Forum: http://forum.eprints.org/
*** Options: http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/eprints-tech *** Archive: http://www.eprints.org/tech.php/ *** EPrints community wiki: http://wiki.eprints.org/ *** EPrints developers Forum: http://forum.eprints.org/ *** Options: http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/eprints-tech *** Archive: http://www.eprints.org/tech.php/ *** EPrints community wiki: http://wiki.eprints.org/ *** EPrints developers Forum: http://forum.eprints.org/ |
- References:
- [EP-tech] Loading the manage deposits create a new cache table everytime
- From: Emilian Mitocariu <mitocariu.emilian@gmail.com>
- Re: [EP-tech] ORCID Support Advance Update
- From: Will Fyson <R.W.Fyson@soton.ac.uk>
- Re: [EP-tech] ORCID Support Advance Update
- From: John Salter <J.Salter@leeds.ac.uk>
- Re: [EP-tech] ORCID Support Advance Update
- From: Tomasz Neugebauer <Tomasz.Neugebauer@concordia.ca>
- [EP-tech] Loading the manage deposits create a new cache table everytime
- Prev by Date: Re: [EP-tech] ORCID Support Advance Update
- Next by Date: Re: [EP-tech] ORCID Support Advance Update
- Previous by thread: [EP-tech] Sort view with creators_name and corp_creators
- Index(es):