On 2025-04-14, at 17:33, John R. Levine <jo...@iecc.com> wrote: > > Remember the point of this dicussion, that ORCID is an identifier that is > likely to help find people whose contact info has gone stale. An > "unmaintained" library catalog doesn't strike me as useful for that purpose.
There is no doubt that ORCID is the better identifier. *Right now*. I just wanted to point out that there are others. Thinking in terms of decades has taught me that properties and preferences can change, and I wanted to point out that ORCIDs are not the only persistent personal identifier out there that is here to stay. So I’ll stick to my main point: Design for choice. Specifically, make sure that the mechanisms allow for choice, even if we currently turn out to evolve policies that prefer one of those choices. Grüße, Carsten PS.: One of my usual less-than-perfect analogies would be URIs: Between mid-1990s and mid-2010s, http clearly was the scheme to use. Being able to swap in https at slightly less than herculean effort was the result of design for choice. _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list -- rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org To unsubscribe send an email to rfc-interest-le...@rfc-editor.org
