[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[EP-tech] ORCID Support Advance Update
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 at 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 at ecs.soton.ac.uk
<eprints-tech-bounces at ecs.soton.ac.uk> *On Behalf Of *John Salter
*Sent:* August 2, 2018 7:14 AM
*To:* eprints-tech at ecs.soton.ac.uk
*Subject:* Re: [EP-tech] ORCID Support Advance Update
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 at ecs.soton.ac.uk
<mailto:eprints-tech-bounces at ecs.soton.ac.uk>[mailto:eprints-tech-bounces at ecs.soton.ac.uk]
*On Behalf Of *Will Fyson
*Sent:* 02 August 2018 12:03
*To:* eprints-tech at ecs.soton.ac.uk <mailto:eprints-tech at ecs.soton.ac.uk>
*Subject:* Re: [EP-tech] ORCID Support Advance Update
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.
The alternative approach would be to introduce a notion of
guest/external users to EPrints so that when external authors are added
we can store the fact that this user was added via a trustworthy
upstream system and we have an actual user object for them.
Ultimately I believe ORCID themselves would prefer the idea that the
repository emails the external author and so the author can authenticate
their ORCID - this too would no doubt be easier to do with a
guest/external user type, but should the ORCID plugin(s) be introducing
new user types and muddying the user dataset?
Many thanks,
Will
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:*John Salter [J.Salter at leeds.ac.uk <mailto:J.Salter at 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-editorsrecently
- 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 at ecs.soton.ac.uk
<mailto:eprints-tech-bounces at ecs.soton.ac.uk>[mailto:eprints-tech-bounces at ecs.soton.ac.uk]
*On Behalf Of *Will Fyson
*Sent:* 02 August 2018 10:59
*To:* eprints-tech at ecs.soton.ac.uk <mailto:eprints-tech at ecs.soton.ac.uk>
*Subject:* Re: [EP-tech] ORCID Support Advance Update
Hi Tomasz,
The ORCID Support Advance plugin does only allow ORCIDs to be stored
against creators/editors if they can be matched to a user via the
'Email' column in all circumstances (to facilitate the read-only nature
of the field). Therefore ORCIDs added through use of the ORCID Support
plugin are affected by this too.
When we've been installing the Advance plugin on repositories we've been
encouraging administrators to tidy up their ORCID data so that the
ORCIDs stored are matched with user profiles. 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.
If an email isn't present in the creator/editor field, but an ORCID is,
the ORCID would be removed the next time the EPrint is recommitted. The
ORCID Support Advance plugin contains a pre-commit trigger that updates
the ORCID field based on the email column to help keep the record up to
date. These triggers are disabled by default when the plugin is
installed however to prevent any accidental erasing of data by
installing the plugin. (the fields are read-only upon installing the
plugin however and so until the triggers are re-enabled the content of
the creator/editor ORCID fields is essentially fixed.)
I hope this helps answer your questions!
Many thanks,
Will
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:*Tomasz Neugebauer [Tomasz.Neugebauer at concordia.ca
<mailto:Tomasz.Neugebauer at 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 at ecs.soton.ac.uk
<mailto:eprints-tech-bounces at ecs.soton.ac.uk><eprints-tech-bounces at ecs.soton.ac.uk>
<mailto:eprints-tech-bounces at ecs.soton.ac.uk>*On Behalf Of *Will Fyson
*Sent:* July 11, 2018 10:16 AM
*To:* eprints-tech at ecs.soton.ac.uk <mailto:eprints-tech at ecs.soton.ac.uk>
*Subject:* [EP-tech] ORCID Support Advance Update
Hi Everyone,
A couple of minor updates have been applied to the ORCID Support Advance
plugin, bringing it up to version 1.3.2.
The updates are only very minor, fixing issues where the plugin was
generating a few too many messages in the indexer and error logs. A
Change Log documenting these most recent changes is available at
https://wiki.eprints.org/w/ORCID_Support
Regarding the discussion a couple of emails above in the EP-Tech list
("Import by DOI in ORCID plugin"), a new DOI imported that takes ORCIDs
into account is not available at present. Due to the requirements that
the ORCID field must be readonly when connected to the member API so
that ORCIDs can only be added via an authoritative source, the ORCID
field that is added to the creator/editor tables cannot be edited.
Therefore to stop values from being entered, which then later cannot be
removed, 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.
This is an issue we're looking into resolving however and so hopefully
we should have some updates on it in the future!
Many thanks,
Will
*** 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/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/eprints-tech/attachments/20180803/1e57dc0b/attachment-0001.html