nicnames: an overview names roundtable, 18 june 2010 rebecca parker research services librarian swinburne university of technology subject matter expert nicnames project

NicNames: the project Collaborative project: >Swinburne >University of Newcastle >University of New South Wales Funded by the ARROW Project (arrow.edu.au): >Focused on (but not limited to) repositories Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia

Names: the problem Author name = 20% of academic library catalogue searches Neither consistent nor unique: problem >all published works by a single author >specific papers by known authors How about institutional repositories?

Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia Names: the status quo Browse menus for 3 Australian institutional repositories

Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia NicNames: the process Phase 1: Analysis >Data analysis >Repository manager survey >User research project Phase 2: Development

Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia No one cares what you do until you get it wrong >Swinburne examples: 1. Standard version (controlled) 2. Preferred version 3. Published version NicNames: the discoveries (1)

Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia NicNames: the discoveries (2) Name variants can have meaning >Journal house style >Citation formats >Transliteration, transcription, translation >Patronymics and other inherited names >Changes in personal circumstances >Desired distance from previous publications >Different identities for different contexts

Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia Authority control doesn’t work for IRs >‘Missing’ information >‘Different’ information NicNames: the discoveries (3)

Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia Publications actually tell us a lot about researchers >Field of research (FOR) classifications >Frequent source titles, conferences >Frequent publishers >Publication type >Affiliation >Coauthorship NicNames: the discoveries (4) ARDC: Projects, grants, research data

An obvious solution? Libraries Web University Research (A) unique identifier(s) >People Australia party identifier >LCCN; ISNI; ISADN >Scopus ID >Thomson ResearcherID >GAMS ID >OpenID >Staff ID or address Or one to rule them all … ?

Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia NicNames: the decisions A local approach is appropriate: >Local knowledge >Local systems: repositories, HR A national approach can be coordinated Artificial intelligence can help: >Multiple sources of data are the key

Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia NicNames: the software >Assigns unique IDs >Exports to XML, OAI-PMH (new) >Stores known information about researchers >Makes use of data universities already have >Simple Web application with API (PHP) >Can control which data is exported

ARROW NicNames Project

Chris Smith  Chris Smith

ARROW NicNames Project Ralph = Tim (sometimes)

ARROW NicNames Project

Questions?

ARROW NicNames Project

NicNames and privacy Only public data should be used A ‘no surprises’ approach Configurable export for data elements Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia

NicNames and ARDCPIP Now OAI-PMH compliant Considering future EAC support Can store party IDs where these exist Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia

Questions?

Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia Acknowledgements ARROW Project for funding Thomas Rutter for software screencapture Dr Peter Sefton, ADFI, for help, advice and support throughout the Project

For more information on this presentation, please contact: Rebecca Parker Research Services Librarian Swinburne University of Technology or visit For software questions, please contact Thomas Rutter, Swinburne Library