[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[EP-tech] ORCID Support Advance Update



Thanks for the prompt reply Will, and thanks Philipp for the links ? that is almost exactly the kind of thing I was envisaging in regards to ORCID display.
Outside the context of storing / displaying ORCID ids, I suppose there is a question of whether the item metadata available from ORCID is significantly inferior to that available from Crossref, and whether it is worth attempting to operate a hierarchy of imports for an item depending on the available identifiers / sources (e.g. DOI > Scopus > ORCID ).  I suspect the answer may vary depending on the level of metadata verification that happens at a local level.

Alan

From: eprints-tech-bounces at ecs.soton.ac.uk [mailto:eprints-tech-bounces at ecs.soton.ac.uk] On Behalf Of Will Fyson
Sent: 12 July 2018 15:56
To: eprints-tech at ecs.soton.ac.uk
Subject: Re: [EP-tech] ORCID Support Advance Update

Hi Philipp, Alan,

Apologies if I have confused things. The context that I thought DOIs were being considered in was one of importing records using a DOI and adding ORCID data to the readonly field during this DOI import, as opposed to the mechanism used when importing records from ORCID.

Alan is quite right, in that the problem at the moment is that we have no way specifying how the ORCID was validated, and so for the time being we only allow ORCIDs to be validated through a connected user account. Whilst we know that an ORCID added via a DOI is likely to be validated the repository doesn't at present so we need to develop a way of storing that bit of provenance information. This is something that we're looking into, but this sounds like an idea that would be generally useful, not just within the ORCID context, so we're looking into ways of adding it to core EPrints.

Regarding the old import plugin, I believe this essentially was an interface for other import plugins such as the DOI import plugin - i.e. it looked up a user's ORCID works, found what identifiers were available and used corresponding import plugins to import the works. It was designed to use the old ORCID API which is no longer available, whereas the ORCID Support Advance importer was built to a different specification and with the new API in mind.

I hope this helps clarify things a little!

Many thanks,

Will


________________________________
From: Philipp Zumstein [philipp.zumstein at bib.uni-mannheim.de<mailto:philipp.zumstein at bib.uni-mannheim.de>] Sent: 12 July 2018 15:21 To: Eprints-tech Subject: Re: [EP-tech] ORCID Support Advance Update

I have read Will's answer such that ORCID wants that (A) the field is

readonly and therefore (B) there is no DOI lookup during ORCID import. I

haven't read that (B) is something ORCID wants. It was rather argued

that this follows from (A), but this implication is what I disagree.



AFAIS the old Import From ORCID plugin does also use a DOI lookup and

relies only the public API: http://wiki.eprints.org/w/ImportFromORCID .

It should be that more is possible with access to the member API.



Alan, I have seen different colors for validated/non-validated ORCIDs in

DBLP, e.g. [1] vs. [2], but have in mind that they are no ORCID member.



Best regards,

Philipp



[1] http://dblp.uni-trier.de/pers/hd/b/Bizer:Christian

[2] http://dblp.uni-trier.de/pers/hd/b/Baierer:Konstantin





Am 12.07.2018 um 15:34 schrieb Alan.Stiles:

I think Will was saying that it works the way it does at the moment because that is how ORCID has specified it has to work for them to approve the plugin to access their systems. I'd agree that it doesn't seem the most useful and hopefully there is some discussion and agreement to be made with ORCID.

Perhaps there is some room in the system for identifying where the stored ORCID ID is a locally validated one versus a third party value?  E.G. human readable interface shows the green icon for validated and a grey one for 3rd party import / locally unverified, and a similar flag value in any of the machine interfaces?



Maybe Will can expand upon the resolutions EPS are considering?

I'll raise my suggestion with the UK ORCID consortium folks at Jisc in case they can raise it with ORCID or already have other ideas.



Alan



-----Original Message-----

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 Philipp Zumstein

Sent: 12 July 2018 14:04

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 Will,



thank you for the new version and fixing two issues thereby.



I don't understand your argumentation for not using a DOI lookup during the import from ORCID process. The data in Crossref which includes some ORCIDs will already have been authorized by the author(s), otherwise the ORCIDs would not be part of Crossref data. Thereby, I see no reason that the users have to authorize again in the repository. I also see no reason why a user want to (manually) replace an ORCID coming from Crossref. Is there a realistic scenario for that? However, even besides the ORCID information, the other bibliographic data from Crossref is much better than the one which can be imported by orcid.org only. Can you reconsider the availability of an DOI import for the ORCID plugin?



Best regards,

Philipp





Am 11.07.2018 um 16:15 schrieb Will Fyson:

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/

-- The Open University is incorporated by Royal Charter (RC 000391), an exempt charity in England & Wales and a charity registered in Scotland (SC 038302). The Open University is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority in relation to its secondary activity of credit broking.



*** 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/20180712/52b4cf01/attachment-0001.html