Thanks Anna - and I, in turn, do recognise that some institutions are going to want to report from their CERIF-based CRIS systems rather than their IRs.

I would have been more than happy, as you suggested in an earlier post, to collaborate with OpenAIRE on future development in this area. It does sound, however, as though this development is already happening. I'll look out for the results in May.

Paul Walk
(sent from phone)

On 9 Apr 2013, at 21:36, Anna Clements <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Thanks, Paul and understand your immediate priority - however I'm assuming you can understand my concern given that we already have a CERIF compliant CRIS - and so do an increasing number of institutions -  so it would be good to have an initial CERIF option available ASAP. 
> 
> For info, the first OpenAire CERIF application profile is due to be presented at the next euroCRIS membership meeting in Bonn (May 13-14).  More info at the euroCRIS website.
> 
> All the best
> 
> Anna
> 
> 
> Anna Clements
> Enterprise Architect
> University of St Andrews
> St Andrews, Fife,KY16 9AL
> 
> On 9 Apr 2013, at 17:39, "Paul Walk" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
>> As I've said before, the issue isn't about CERIF right now so much as about what sort of data structures the existing, established IR systems and workflows can support. We could have modelled that level of expression in CERIF but that wouldn't have gained us anything - especially as we are waiting for consensus on vocabularies.
>> 
>> A consensual CERIF modelling exercise for future reporting requirements may well be possible - but the requirements and the capabilities of the instructional systems are significant factors too.
>> 
>> Paul
>> 
>> Paul Walk
>> (sent from phone)
>> 
>> On 9 Apr 2013, at 17:24, Anna Clements <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> 
>>> I would argue that we should have a CERIF version available asap [OpenAire already have agreed to produce a CERIF application profile].
>>> 
>>> Can we not all work together and produce a single CERIF application profile that will satisfy OpenAire and RIOXX [RCUK] ? This will avoid the need to implement duplicate DC application profiles in systems which are already CERIF compliant.
>>> 
>>> http://www.openaire.eu/en/component/content/article/9-news-events/447-eurocris-and-openaire-work-together-to-enable-data-exchange-with-cris
>>> 
>>> Anna
>>> 
>>> __________________________________________________
>>> Anna Clements
>>> Enterprise Architect
>>> University of St Andrews
>>> 01334 462761
>>> 
>>> ________________________________________
>>> From: Repositories discussion list [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Lawson, Gerald J. [[log in to unmask]]
>>> Sent: 09 April 2013 09:48
>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>> Subject: Re: Comments on RIOXX 0.91
>>> 
>>> Simeon, from NERC's point of view all our grants now begin with NE/, and previously they began with NER/.  UK Research Councils have formats similar to this, but other funders are less consistent.  So while Option 3 would have been ideal RIOxx was forced to take a more pragmatic solution.  CERIF will help things, and the ideal will be some sort of DOI system for GrantIDs - but we need an interim solution.
>>> 
>>> Gerry Lawson, NERC Research Information Systems, 01793-444417 (o) 07740-068060 (m) [log in to unmask]
>>> ________________________________________
>>> From: Repositories discussion list [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Paul Walk [[log in to unmask]]
>>> Sent: 09 April 2013 07:39
>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>> Subject: Re: Comments on RIOXX 0.91
>>> 
>>> As I said in my analysis:
>>> 
>>> http://www.rioxx.net/2013/01/29/approaches-to-handling-funders-and-projectids-in-a-rioxx-record/
>>> 
>>> "If we can implement option 3 without damaging the chances of the overall solution being adopted by repository managers on the common platforms, then this would be an attractive solution for the short term."
>>> 
>>> Unfortunately, following close consultation with IR platform developers, it became apparent that option 3 (composite funder/projectID) was not viable without significant disruption to established IRs which would inhibit rapid adoption. As the (local) reconciliation of funder with projectID is not actually a pre-requisite for meeting the fairly narrow set of requirements for RIOXX, the decision has been taken to go with option 1. In the meantime, exploratory work towards option 5 continues, and this could if it became a reality be implemented in RIOXX as it stands.
>>> 
>>> Regarding the demand for funding information - the primary purpose of RIOXX is to collect such information. EPrints and DSpace developers are, right now, figuring out how this should be handled in an IR.
>>> 
>>> Paul
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 9 Apr 2013, at 03:57, Simeon Warner <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I read the RIOXX with particular interest in the handling of funding because this is something we want to do for arXiv and I'd like a general solution. I think there should structure to handle the case of multiple funders properly. I like the analysis given in the post
>>>> 
>>>> http://www.rioxx.net/2013/01/29/approaches-to-handling-funders-and-projectids-in-a-rioxx-record/
>>>> 
>>>> but I would conclude that option 3 is the only viable one, i.e. the structure:
>>>> 
>>>> funding [0 or more]
>>>> - funder [1]
>>>> - projectID [1]
>>>> 
>>>> If there was desire to leave the door open to option 5 then perhaps funding could have an optional id attribute like other elements in the RIOXX profile? (Would perhaps be nice for interchange with OpenAire systems.)
>>>> 
>>>> I also think it would be unhelpful to have a RIOXX profile that demands an article have funding information -- what if there were none? Would one then have to omit that article from a a RIOXX format metadata feed?
>>>> 
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Simeon
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 4/8/13 8:59 PM, David Palmer wrote:
>>>>> When there are multiple funders with multiple project IDs, these tags
>>>>> will repeat.  Then, how to show which projectID belongs to which
>>>>> funder?  How to associate an URI with either of them?
>>>>> 
>>>>> How to show author affiliation on multiple co-authors?
>>>>> 
>>>>> David T Palmer
>>>>> 
>>>>> Associate University Librarian & Digital Strategist
>>>>> 
>>>>> The University of Hong Kong Libraries
>>>>> 
>>>>> 10/F Kennedy Town Centre
>>>>> 
>>>>> 23 Belcher’s Street
>>>>> 
>>>>> Kennedy Town
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hong Kong SAR
>>>>> 
>>>>> Tel. +852 3921 2921
>>>>> 
>>>>> _http://hub.hku.hk/rp/rp00001_
>>> 
>>> -------------------------------------------
>>> Paul Walk
>>> Blog: http://blog.paulwalk.net
>>> Skype: paulwalk
>>> Twitter: paulwalk
>>> Mobile: 07812 510001
>>> -------------------------------------------
>>> 
>>> This message (and any attachments) is for the recipient only. NERC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the contents of this email and any reply you make may be disclosed by NERC unless it is exempt from release under the Act. Any material supplied to NERC may be stored in an electronic records management system.