Martin Fenner is also from ORCID but is going to talk about ORCID. He starts off with some assumptions – we are all agreed that authors need identifiers, he doesn’t want to talk about technology and he doesn’t want to talk about the business model. His talk will focus on how to make this stuff work, and why we are getting it wrong so far.
Fenner lists the following issues:
- A succesful identifer has to be used across many many different systems under different jurisdictions.
- A successful identifer needs to be used. A perfect identifer cannot be launched as a ‘big bang’ where everyone changes.
- A succesful identifer needs to be built up within the community.
The proposed approach from ORCID?
- ORCID is discipline neutral and is being used in multiple countries.
- More importantly ORCID interacts with other author identifier systems but does not try to replace them…a lot of these are owned by a specific publisher.
- ORCID wants to be open – in the following contexts: anyone should be able to apply for an ORCID identifier, all ORCID data is openly available, the ORCID sofware is open source.
Fenner ends up by talking about consent – which sends ripples through the REFEDS folks in the room. Does ORCID empower people to say I permit that you can use my dataset in association with this publication? I’m not so sure about the level of choice involved in this process. Publish or die does not really create a consent based policy approach – some more food for thought.
Excellent chairing by the beepy bot and a creative commons slideset bring us to the end of this session with happy smiles. ORCID registrations will start in the next 12 months or so.