Some rip-RORing news for affiliation metadata – Crossref

“We’ve just added to our input schema the ability to include affiliation information using ROR identifiers. Members who register content using XML can now include ROR IDs, and we’ll add the capability to our manual content registration tools, participation dashboards, and metadata retrieval APIs in the near future. And we are inviting members to a Crossref/ROR webinar on 29th September at 3pm UTC.”

ROR and GRID: The Way Forward

“Earlier today, GRID announced that it will discontinue its schedule of public releases in Q4 2021. This decision marks an important and exciting milestone in the evolution of both organization registries.

ROR’s core mission is to be a community-led registry of open organization identifiers. While GRID has maintained an open registry of organization identifiers available CC0 to the community since 2015, it did not intend to serve as a community-driven initiative. Therefore, it was a natural arrangement to jump-start ROR with seed data from GRID, and accept ongoing updates from GRID while developing ROR to ultimately function independently as the community registry of record. The plan has always been that ROR would inevitably need to be able to diverge from GRID in order to more fully address the requirements and use cases that come with maintaining a community-based initiative. GRID’s recent decision aligns perfectly with the progress ROR has already made towards this goal….”

GRID passes the torch to ROR – Digital Science

“In 2015 Digital Science first released the Global Research Identifier Database (GRID), an open database of unique research-related organisation identifiers they had developed in-house over several years, for public use by the research community. In 2019 ROR, the Research Organization Registry, was founded as a community-driven initiative, mirroring the GRID database. With ROR coming of age and becoming independent from GRID, Digital Science has decided to pass on the torch to ROR and retire GRID from the public space, with a last public release in Q4 of 2021.

This might come as a surprise, as GRID and ROR have been co-existing and collaborating for quite some time now. GRID was initially created to fill a void, as no open organisation identifier was available for the open research space. As a community-driven initiative has now built upon GRID’s first initiative, two open organisation identifiers could be perceived as competing against each other. Digital Science has therefore decided to formally hand the torch over to ROR as the leading open organisation identifier. Digital Science will continue to use GRID internally- but focused on the Digital Science products and their users and clients….”

About Metascience 2021

“The Metascience 2021 Conference is a global virtual gathering to connect the study of science across disciplines, methodologies, and regions. It follows the inaugural Metascience 2019 Symposium held at Stanford University. Metascience 2021 is an initiative of the Center for Open Science (COS), the Association for Interdisciplinary Meta-Research and Open Science (AIMOS), and the Research on Research Institute (RoRI) and is generously supported by the Templeton World Charity Foundation and the RoRI consortium.”

New Open Access Business Models – What’s Needed to Make Them Work? – The Scholarly Kitchen

“The third CHORUS Forum meeting, held last week, is a relatively new entrant into the scholarly communication meeting calendar. The meeting has proven to be a rare opportunity to bring together publishers, researchers, librarians, and research funders. I helped organize and moderated a session during the Forum, on the theme of “Making the Future of Open Research Work.” You can watch my session, which looked at new models for sustainable and robust open access (OA) publishing, along with the rest of the meeting in the video below.

The session focuses on the operationalization of the move to open access and the details of what it takes to experiment with a new business model. The model the community has the most experience with, the individual author paying an article-processing-charge (APC), works really well for some authors, in some subject areas, in some geographies. But it is not a universal solution to making open access work and it creates new inequities as it resolves others….

Some of the key takeaways for me were found in the commonalities across all of the models. The biggest hurdle that each organization faced in executing its plans was gathering and analyzing author data. As Sara put it, “Data hygiene makes or breaks all of these models.” For PLOS and the ACM, what they’re asking libraries to support is authorship – the model essentially says “this many papers had authors from your institution and what you pay will largely be based on the volume of your output.” But disambiguating author identity, and especially identifying which institutions each represents, remains an enormous problem. While we do have persistent identifiers (PIDs) like ORCID, and the still-under-development ROR, their use is not universal, and we still lack a unifying mechanism to connect the various PIDs into a simple, functional tool to support this type of analysis.

One solution would be requiring authors to accurately identify their host institutions from a controlled vocabulary, but this runs up against most publishers’ desire to streamline the article submission process. There’s a balance to be struck, but probably one that’s going to ask authors to provide more accurate and detailed information….

[M]oving beyond the APC is essential to the long-term viability of open access, and there remains much experimentation to be done….”

There’s A PID For That! Next Steps in Establishing a National PID Strategy – Jisc scholarly communications

“A stakeholder group was therefore formed earlier this year, with representatives from all disciplines and sectors — funders, HEIs, infrastructure providers, libraries, publishers, researchers, research managers, and more. At an initial meeting of this group in April, participants discussed the five persistent identifiers (PIDs) that have been deemed high priority for improving access to UK research. These are ORCID iDs for people, Crossref and DataCite DOIs for outputs, Crossref grant DOIs, ROR identifiers for organisations, and RAiDs for projects.  This was followed by five focus group meetings during May and June, each focused on one of the priority PIDs….”

DataCite Commons – Exploiting the Power of PIDs and the PID Graph

“Today DataCite is proud to announce the launch of DataCite Commons, available at https://commons.datacite.org. DataCite Commons is a discovery service that enables simple searches while giving users a comprehensive overview of connections between entities in the research landscape. This means that DataCite members registering DOIs with us will have easier access to information about the use of their DOIs and can discover and track connections between their DOIs and other entities. DataCite Commons was developed as part of the EC-funded project Freya and will form the basis of new DataCite services….

We integrate with both the ORCID and ROR (Research Organization Registry) APIs to enable a search for (10 million) people and (100,000) organizations and to show the associated content. For funding, we take advantage of the inclusion of Crossref Funder IDs in ROR metadata. We combine these connections, showing a funder, research organization, or researcher not only their content but also the citations and views and downloads if available, together with aggregate statistics such as numbers by year or content type….”

Introducing the PID Services Registry

“We are pleased to announce the launch of the new persistent identifier (PID) services registry available at https://pidservices.org, a new service to find services built upon different PIDs from core technology providers and those who integrate from across a variety of disciplinary areas. This is a combined effort across multiple organizations as part of the EC-funded FREYA project grant (777523) with the aim of furthering discoverability of PIDs and the services that are built upon them….”

What is up with ORCID and ROR? | ORCID

“Will ROR IDs be supported in the ORCID Registry?

Yes. Adding RORs to the ORCID Registry is on our roadmap. Open identifiers for organizations are a critical component of trusted assertions.  While we work out the complex interdependencies involved in implementing ROR, we continue to actively encourage their adoption and use in a wide variety of communication channels.

Will ORCID move to using only ROR organization IDs? 

ORCID is all-in with persistent identifiers. We support a diverse global community with a variety of use cases and requirements.  We are keenly aware that reaching consensus on “the one” is difficult, if not distracting, as we all work toward digital transformation and open research goals.  We expect messiness during this transitional period and strive to provide and support tools – technical and communications – to help manage it, such as FAIR, CARE, and Metadata 2020.  We currently support four organization ID types (GRID, LEI, Crossref funder ID, and Ringgold) in affiliation, funding, research resource, and peer review items. Similarly, we support multiple ID types for other items in the ORCID registry (e.g., DOI, PMID, ISBN and over 40 other identifier types for works; Scopus, ResearcherID, ISNI and others for people).  …”

What is up with ORCID and ROR? | ORCID

“Will ROR IDs be supported in the ORCID Registry?

Yes. Adding RORs to the ORCID Registry is on our roadmap. Open identifiers for organizations are a critical component of trusted assertions.  While we work out the complex interdependencies involved in implementing ROR, we continue to actively encourage their adoption and use in a wide variety of communication channels.

Will ORCID move to using only ROR organization IDs? 

ORCID is all-in with persistent identifiers. We support a diverse global community with a variety of use cases and requirements.  We are keenly aware that reaching consensus on “the one” is difficult, if not distracting, as we all work toward digital transformation and open research goals.  We expect messiness during this transitional period and strive to provide and support tools – technical and communications – to help manage it, such as FAIR, CARE, and Metadata 2020.  We currently support four organization ID types (GRID, LEI, Crossref funder ID, and Ringgold) in affiliation, funding, research resource, and peer review items. Similarly, we support multiple ID types for other items in the ORCID registry (e.g., DOI, PMID, ISBN and over 40 other identifier types for works; Scopus, ResearcherID, ISNI and others for people).  …”