Register a URN.

[RokeJulianLockhart]

I don't see any standardised format for referencing ORCiDs outside of the centralized URI format currently employed. Consequently, I propose that the operators of ORCID register a URN schema. This is especially important for this project, because the ID is so frequently printed (an immutable and static format). URIs are not designed for this purpose, since they refer to where to access the information, rather than merely the identifier itself.

[wjrsimpson]

Hi @RokeJulianLockhart,

The only way to reference an ORCiD is indeed using the URI format described in the docs.

You can see the thinking around this in the whitepaper about the ORCiD structure. Although it does not mention URNs specifically, the section titled 'Affordance' describes the relevant factors that were taken into account in deciding the format.

I do think your argument has some merit, and indeed the use of http versus https caused us some challenges a few years ago. However, we won't be changing this again in the forseable future.

[RokeJulianLockhart]

I do think your argument has some merit, and indeed the use of http versus https caused us some challenges a few years ago. However, we won't be changing this again in the forseable future.

@wjrsimpson, this is a request for a complimenting format, not a replacement. That is because a URN cannot replace a URI, for it does not provide the user with a method of accessing the resource.

Likewise, a URI is unnecessarily verbose where a URN would be useful, for it describes how to access the ID, rather than merely identifies, like an ISBN does. There's a reason that (printed) literature includes URN:ISBN:951-0-18435-7 ¹ instead of https://isbnsearch.org/isbn/9510184357.

Footnotes

1. datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc2288#section-3.2 ↩