I'm also curious as to whether institutions are looking at including any of these identifiers in their university-wide data systems, as opposed to just being maintained in library-land.

At the University of Arizona, the campus is implementing an online system for faculty reviews that aims to pull publication data directly from publisher sources (as contracted/allowed by the data source). For obvious reasons of researcher disambiguation having these different identifiers reported and stored would be beneficial.

-=- Maliaca

Maliaca Oxnam
Associate Librarian
Office of Digital Innovation & Stewardship
University of Arizona Libraries
Tucson, AZ
[log in to unmask]

-----Original Message-----
From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Eric Lease Morgan
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2014 11:34 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [CODE4LIB] orcid and researcherid and scopus, oh my

ORDID and ResearcherID and Scopus, oh my!

It is just me, or are there an increasing number of unique identifiers popping up in Library Land? A person can now be identified with any one of a number of URIs such as:

  * ORCID -
  * ResearcherID -
  * Scopus -
  * VIAF -
  * LC -
  * ISNI -

At least these identifiers are (for the most part) "cool". 

I have a new-to-me hammer, and these identifiers can play a nice role in linked data. For example:

  @prefix dc: <> .
  <> dc:creator
    "" ,
    "" ,
    "" ,
    "" .

How have any of y'all used theses sorts of identifiers, and what problems do you think you will be able to solve by doing so? For example, I know of a couple of instances where these sort of identifiers are being put into MARC records. 

Eric Morgan