The release of the ORCID AuthN API opens opportunities for R&E federations to better integrate the ORCID ID into the FIM flow.
In the context of GN3plus, there is the possibility to work on using ORCID as a third party attribute provider and to do some kind of account linking. Use-cases that would benefit from the ORCID ID are welcome!
|The Data Observation Network for Earth (DataONE.org) project uses federated authentication (InCommon.org / CILogon.org) for data access. Linking ORCID identities with federated identities (via the ORCID OAuth API) would enable DataONE to associate the data owner's ORCID identity with the data. Since data objects will persist in DataONE for many years, using a persistent ORCID identity is valuable when data owners change institutions (resulting in changed federated identities).||Jim Basney <email@example.com>|
|The UCLA Faculty Information System (Opus) project will be using UCLA Shibboleth SSO (an InCommon IDP) for authentication. Opus will provide services to UCLA faculty as well as external scholars who are not part of UCLA IDP. Associating ORCID ID with institutional identity would allow Opus to track user identity and apply authorization rules based on ORCID ID returned from Shibboleth authentication for both federated authentication and local SSO case. It would also help in identity consolidation when scholars move from one institution to another.||Ying Ma <firstname.lastname@example.org>|
|Enter Text||Enter Text|
Regarding Jim's use case, I always wonder the following
- does the user own the data as an individual (dataset associated to an ORCID ID)
- if s/he changes his/her institution and the new institution does not think curating the data belongs to his/her job description, who takes care of the data?
- if (when) s/he passes away, do his/her heirs then become the data owners? They don't necessary have any scientific background
- does the user own the data as an employee of his/her institution (dataset associated to an ePPN)
- if s/he changes his/her institution, s/he loses the ownership of his/her datasets
- this means, it is actually the institution that owns the dataset (and nominates an employee to curate them)
I think this issue needs to be solved first. ORCID ID makes sense only if the user owns the IPRs of the research results as an individual.
DataONE use cases include ownership by individuals, ownership by organizations, and transfer of ownership (see: http://mule1.dataone.org/ArchitectureDocs-current/). At many universities in the United States, academic works are owned by the creator, not the institution. Solving all the IPR challenges of long-term data curation is not a pre-condition for using ORCID IDs in metadata. --Jbasney@illinois.edu 18:20, 30 May 2014 (UTC)