|
Why not use a link to a datatracker record, rather than ORCID? Or is that too obvious?
Milers From: John Levine <johnl@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, April 13, 2025 1:17 PM To: ietf@xxxxxxxx <ietf@xxxxxxxx> Cc: mcr+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxx <mcr+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: ORCID, Identity systems, was Authorship It appears that Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxx> said:
>I'm not sure that I understand how having the old email contacts in the DT >helps, if the document does not also have the DT link. From the DT copy of >the RFC, I can see that we can link to the person (within the database). Buf >if the person looking at the RFC is already at that place, then we don't >really need anything else. I have copies of all the RFCs on my laptop. If I'm reading an old RFC and try to write to someone and it bounces, I guess I would go look at the Datatracker. The ORCID API has the ability to search by email so that's an additional place we could look if people updated their ORCID record but didn't publish a later RFC. >I wound up going through it manually, and I found some DOIs that didn't work. >I reported this to RFC-editor. Maybe this belongs to DT. >I'm not sure which does the DOI dance. I'm assuming RFC editor/RPC. DOIs of our own documents that start with 10.17487/ or something else? I wrote the original code that assigns our DOIs and uploads the metadata, so if it's one of ours that's a bug. If it's someone else's, bitrot happens in the DOI database just like anywhere else. R's, John |
