Researcher Identifiers: National approaches to ORCID and ISNI implementation

Researcher Identifier_2

Researcher identifiers: National approaches to ORCID and ISNI implementation: [Workshop and Report]. Author, Nicky Ferguson. Knowledge Exchange. 2015.

Descargar

Knowledge exchange has a long standing interest in persistent object and person identifiers. In March 2012, a Digital Author Identifiers Summit was held in London which brought together various national and international organisations working in the field to support efforts of consensus on an international scale1 . The summit was a small but key piece in the international jigsaw enabling subsequent widespread adoption of ORCID and ISNI and voicing various communities’ concerns that close cooperation between the two was highly desirable. Three years later, some of the world’s largest research funders, institutions and publishers have integrated ORCID identifiers into their systems and workflows. As of June 2015, ORCID has issued 1.4 million identifiers. ISNI holds public records of over 8 million individuals of which 2.25 million are researchers. At the same time, ISNI and ORCID have taken steps to define system interoperability and have developed an ISNI to ORCID search and link tool. Currently, ORCID uses Ringgold/ISNI organisation identifiers for its affiliation module. More and more countries are making collected efforts to provide ORCID identifiers for their researchers and encouraging implementation of ORCID iDs into the national and local research information infrastructure. In June 2015, KE brought together representatives from its five member countries for a Knowledge Exchange Workshop on National approaches to ORCID and ISNI implementation. The aim of the workshop was to share national perspectives on ORCID and ISNI, including the challenges, solutions and lessons learned with regards to implementation of ORCID and ISNI on a national scale. Issues discussed included legal and regulatory challenges, authentication and integration and also outstanding issues of functionality, interoperability, policy and sustainability. This report gives an account of the meeting and presents some outstanding challenges, some possible solutions and begins to take stock and look ahead; what lessons have we learned that should we take into account when moving on to organisational and other identifiers?”

Share/Bookmark

Responder

Por favor, inicia sesión con uno de estos métodos para publicar tu comentario:

Logo de WordPress.com

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de WordPress.com. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Imagen de Twitter

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Twitter. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Foto de Facebook

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Facebook. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Google+ photo

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Google+. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Conectando a %s