Orcid works metadata working group charge

1,429 views
1,126 views

Published on

One of the ways that ORCID works with the community is through ORCID technical working groups (TWGs). These groups help define and refine how the Registry works. The Works Metadata working group is helping us develop a set of recommendations about information stored in the Registry about publications and other works. Learn more about ORCID's community involvement: http://orcid.org/about/community

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,429
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Orcid works metadata working group charge

  1. 1. Works Metadata Working Group ChargeCharge of the ORCID Works Metadata Working GroupWorks data are an important component of ORCID’s mission to help individuals distinguishthemselves. Works describe research activities: publications, data sets, or other recognizedoutputs. The ORCID registry provides a mechanism to connect works data to ORCIDaccounts, and facilities to store, manage and query sets of descriptions of research worksassociated with a personal identity. The ORCID Registry can thus aggregate and connect worksdata from a multiplicity of research information sources.Works are described using a simple metadata schema, sufficient to identify common work typeslike scholarly published articles, working papers, etc. It may be helpful to distinguish betweenthe ‘data model’ of works in ORCID (what elements are used to describe a work, in whatvocabularies, etc.), and the ‘service model’ – viz. how works data are used in queries. Theservice model is to a fairly large extent delimited by the various user interfaces and APIs thatORCID exposes for works. But it also encompasses a larger spectrum of issues around ‘bestpractices’, policy, licensing, guidelines for use, etc. that APIs do not define or constrain.This group will review the current works data and service models, with the aim to answer thefollowing questions: • Is the current data model sufficiently expressive – meaning can it describe all the types of research activities that could be recognized as ‘works’? Are the attributes (metadata) sufficiently precise, flexible? • How well does the current model conform to the needs of the works metadata suppliers (publishers, information service providers, etc.)? Is it too onerous or complicated? Does it require explicit ‘profiles’? • How well does the current model conform to the needs of works consumers – which might include both internal use of works data in disambiguation algorithms, but also external users and services such as profile systems. • While works information is generally considered to be public, do ORCID works data need any usage guidelines/practices/descriptions/provenance? • What service guarantees (or representations) should ORCID make - if any - about works data with respect to accuracy, currency or completeness? • What works data provider quality restrictions, if any, should the service impose? E.g. must a citation be ‘parsable’? Any minimum number of fields, languages, encodings, etc.These questions are intended to be suggestive of the possible breadth of inquiries, not asimplying deficiencies in the current ORCID technical architecture or services. Page 1 of 1 2013-02-19

×