Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- wiki:m1.3 [2023/12/20 14:40] – [Contributors] esoeding
+++ wiki:m1.3 [Unknown date] (current) – removed - external edit (Unknown date) 127.0.0.1
@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-**Recommendation M1.3**
-======Recommendation to Helmholtz data stewards, repository maintainers and developers to implement personal  ORCID as a reference to people in technical infrastructures======
-=====Description=====
-[Status: Under development, Date: ~~LASTMOD~~, Version: 003]
-=====Motivation for this Recommendation:=====
-The Helmholtz Association is determined to make their data available
-according to the FAIR principles, thus making it findable, accessible,
-interoperable and reusable. In order to achieve interoperability of
-datasets among various data infrastructures (DIS) within the Helmholtz
-Association, a common and agreed procedure to **refer to people** within
-and across the DIS is needed.
-In order to be able to uniquely and sustainably identify both
-researchers and employees in data infrastructures and repositories in
-the Helmholtz Association, the respective person should always be
-referenced with a persistent identifier (PID) (see recommendation M0).
-For the Helmholtz Association we recommend to use ORCID to refer to
-people and contributors to resources in data infrastructures and
-repositories of the Helmholtz Association wherever possible (see
-recommendation M1.0).
-To be able to implement this measure, several activities need to be
-conducted by different stakeholder groups. This recommendation M1.3.
-calls for activity of the data stewards, repository maintainers and
-developers.
-=====Recommendation=====
-It is recommended that data infrastructures (data repositories, data
-bases) should:
-  - record an ORCID with any person registered in conjunction with the metadata of datasets, publications, instruments and alike where possible.
-  - treat ORCID metadata as the primary source of truth and update their own metadata accordingly.
-  - Optionally inform persons if they think the metadata registered with the ORCID is not accurate, or request permission to update the ORCID metadata (see also M1-1).
-  - consider ORCID as an attribute in identity and access management systems (IAM), authentication and authorisation infrastructures (AAI) or community attribute services
-=====Binding Convention:=====
-^                         ^ mandatory  ^ conditional	          ^ optional ^
-^ Helmholtz FAIR Principle|if ORCID is available            | |          |
-=====Precondition for Implementation:=====
-[__Precondition 1__]: The ORCID Registry is available for all
-researchers, maintained and further developed.
-=====Related Recommendations=====
-Parent: M1.0
-Dependent: none
-Other: M1.1, M1.2
-=====Contributors=====
-[[https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1252-9107|Martin Abbrent ORCID: 0000-0003-1252-9107]] [[https://ror.org/000h6jb29|UFZ]]
-[[https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4467-642X|Emanuel Söding ORCID: 0000-0002-4467-642X]] [[https://ror.org/02h2x0161|GEOMAR]]
-=====Content=====
-=====1. Explanation of the Background and Benefits of the Recommendation=====
-=====2. Possible alternative solutions=====
-=====3. Consideration of the advantages and disadvantages of implementing the recommendation=====
-=====4. The Recommendation=====
-It is recommended that data infrastructures (data repositories, data bases) should:
-. record an ORCID with any person registered in conjunction with the metadata of datasets, publications, instruments and alike where possible.
-. treat ORCID metadata as the primary source of truth and update their own metadata accordingly (see note below).
-. Optionally inform persons if they think the metadata registered with the ORCID is not accurate, or request permission to update the ORCID metadata (see also M1-1).
-. consider ORCID as an attribute in identity and access management systems (IAM), authentication and authorisation infrastructures (AAI) or community attribute services.
-Note on 2. + 3.: treating ORCIDD metadata as the primary source of truth is a conceptual decision on the issue, who is ultimately responsible for personal data. In this model we assume, that each person / contributor, identified by an ORCID is solely responsible for their own data and should only made aware of incorrect information, not forced to update it. Technically institutions could maintain their own records of these personal data. This, however, leads to several problems: 1. the maintenance of this data is very difficult and keeping it current almost imposible; 2. by keeping personal data of people, data privacy becomes an issue, as people cann not control, what data about them is shared with others. This can be avoided by delegating the responsibility for personaly information to the persons themselves, at the cost of not being in full control of that data.
-Note on 4.: Identity and access management systems (IAM), authentication and authorization infrastructures (AAI) or upcoming community attribute services like defined in the [[https://aarc-project.eu/architecture/|AARC blueprint architecture]] are suitable environments for enriching user information, for example with an ORCID attribute. The mechanisms to control forwarding of private and personal user information allows the users to decide if they agree with that. As an attribute of the user objects the usage of ORCID within scientific software applications would be simplified and encouraged.
-=====5. Naming of communities that have already implemented the recommendation=====
-=====6. Documentation of the test to validate correct implementation=====
-=====7. Examples of Instances=====
-=====8. Further Information=====
-====References====
-[12] ORCID Terms of use: https://info.orcid.org/terms-of-use/
-====Relevant Community Recommendations====
-=====9. History of this document=====