search

NCEAS / metadig-checks

MetaDIG suites and checks for data and metadata improvement and guidance.
Apache License 2.0
9 stars 9 forks source link

add check for ORCID in all suites #4

Open mbjones opened 5 years ago

mbjones commented 5 years ago

Creators: ORCID should be present and well-formed using the https URI Associated parties: ORCID optional but recommended

Add at a minimum to KNB, ADC, and FAIR suites.

jagoldstein commented 5 years ago

It is impractical and often not possible to have ORCiDs for all creators. Many creators do not even have ORCiD accounts. The last directive to the support team related to this was to ensure that at least 1 creator in each package has an ORCiD in the EML. Instead, should we not allow creators in the metadata unless ORCID iDs are provided for each of them?

If we want ORCiDs in the metadata for each creator, the editor should require them.

It seems much more important to me that the submitter provides an email address. The absence of these continues to be a barrier to support team productivity. https://github.com/NCEAS/metacatui/issues/545

gothub commented 5 years ago

Currently creators and contacts are both checked to see if their userIds are ORCIDs, and these are INFO checks. I'll add a check for associated parties.

mbjones commented 5 years ago

Thanks, glad to hear they are already INFO checks. What I am suggesting is that we should move these into the regular checks so that they count against the scores generated. I think they should be required checks, as missing these fields decreases discoverability. That said, we can't require the field in the editor because not all people can get ORCIDs (particularly for historical data sets). So, we must accept data sets without compete ORCIDs, but we want the score to indicate that there's more that should be done when they are missing. We don't want a 100% discovery score on datasets missing ORCIDs (or emails).

jagoldstein commented 5 years ago

Ok, but @csjx has directed us NOT to publish new packages until they score 100% in all 3 categories. Did we misunderstand? It seems there is a communication gap here. I'll include this as an agenda item for tomorrow's Arctic call.