1. Tom Demeranville

    Exploring persistent identifiers for academic institutions, publishers, funders and more. Can LOD help?


    Persistent organisation identifiers continue to be a much needed but ‘not-quite-there’ piece of identifier infrastructure.  They are required at many stages of the research production to credit institutions for their contributions, including funding, authorship and publishing.

    There are multiple identifier providers with differing representations and coverage.  Some but not all of these providers link to other identifiers, but all do so in different and proprietary manner making mapping between them difficult. In addition, the identified organisations themselves need to be able to assert information about themselves without needing to manage multiple relationships.  This results in a very complex landscape that makes organisation identifiers difficult to utilise to their full potential.

    In this session we will discuss how organisation identifiers and their metadata could be represented using LOD by the organisations themselves.  We will also consider if LOD can help link the disparate organisation identifier providers so that they can be crosswalked and used interchangeably.   If a solution to these problems already exists then we will examine the barriers that have prevented its adoption and how they might be overcome.

    Background reading and current work on organisation identifiers can be found through the Organisation Identifier Working Group.  The group was formed in early 2017 to refine the structure, principles, and technology specifications for an open, independent, non-profit organization identifier registry to facilitate the disambiguation of researcher affiliations.

  2. Tom Demeranville

    Using schema.org for simple LOD representations within ORCID


    ORCID would like to improve their LOD implementation and at the same time move to a technology that is easier for their core tech team to maintain.  We would like to propose a session that will examine the pros and cons of using a schema.org and JSON-LD based approach to representing researchers and their activities in the ORCID registry . A set of straw man representations will form the basis of a discussion on the various ways this could be achieved.  We’re hoping that this session will help iron out the issues and result in something that is more useful to the community.

    The existing ORCID RDF implementation was generously donated to our open source stack by Stian Soiland-Reyes and contains biographic information.  However, it does not reference other entities and as the technologies used are not within our core competencies they are difficult for us to maintain and extend.  We are hoping it’s possible to produce an enhanced schema.org representation that can be embedded within the registry pages and utilised by a more diverse set of users across multiple use cases.  Examples include being consumed by simple web applications and search engines etc as well as being navigated by automated LOD agents.

    The recent schema.org implementation from the Datacite DOI registrar will form a point of reference and examined to ensure that crosswalking between the two systems is as simple as possible.  Outcomes from other LODLAM sessions discussing schema.org will also be included to ensure we’re on the same page.

    This discussion will be fed back to the ORCID tech team for consideration.

Skip to toolbar