The fourth blog post about metadata matching by ROR’s Adam Buttrick and Crossref’s Dominika Tkaczyk explains how to measure the quality of different matching strategies with an evaluation dataset and metrics. Read all posts in the series on metadata matching. In our previous blog post in this series, we explained why no metadata matching strategy can return perfect results.

We are thrilled to introduce a new member of the ROR pride: Riley Marsh joined the ROR team in August as our new Metadata Manager. As Metadata Manager, Riley will support the day-to-day activities of curating the ROR registry, including triaging incoming requests and processing changes for new registry releases.

We’re looking for your feedback on a draft proposal for managing ROR API client identification with ‘mailto’ parameters or API keys, and comments are open through October 4th, 2024 . Which option would you prefer? Does either option present a significant barrier for your use of the ROR API? Let us know! Since ROR’s launch in 2019, the ROR API has been provided at no cost and with no registration or credentials required.

In this post, we discuss a few common myths about metadata matching that are often encountered when interacting with users, developers, integrators, and other stakeholders.

Optica Publishing Group was one of the earliest publishers to send ROR IDs to Crossref in DOI metadata. In this interview, we speak with them to learn more about their rigorous processes for cleaning organization names.

Several widely used scholarly systems are using ROR IDs to identify and disambiguate funding organizations. In this post, we’ll give you a glimpse of how and why these systems use ROR IDs as funder identifiers. If you’re reading this post, you probably know that for the last ten years, the Crossref Open Funder Registry (formerly FundRef) has been the default identifier for funding organizations.

Crossref, with the help of CWTS Leiden, has just released an exciting update to their participation reports, adding metrics for both affiliations in general and ROR IDs in particular. Now Crossref members can easily see how well they’re doing in providing open affiliation metadata. Read the full text of the Crossref announcement below.

The American Physical Society (APS) has become the largest society publisher to adopt ROR, incorporating it into their manuscript submission process and sending ROR IDs in author affiliation metadata to Crossref. “We’ve been eagerly supporting ROR since before it was ROR,” said APS Lead Data Analyst Arthur Smith.

We’re looking for your feedback on a draft proposal for criteria to include additional external identifiers in ROR records, and comments are open through August 16th . ROR records already include mappings to Crossref Funder IDs, Wikidata, ISNI, and GRID. What additional external IDs do you feel should be added? What criteria do you think other identifiers should meet in order to be added to ROR?

The second blog post about metadata matching by ROR’s Adam Buttrick and Crossref’s Dominika Tkaczyk describes some basic matching-related terminology and the components of a matching process, then poses some typical product questions to consider when developing or integrating matching solutions. Read more about this important work here and in other posts in the matching series.

ROR Curation Lead Adam Buttrick is staying at ROR but moving from Crossref to CDL, which means there's a new position to fill at Crossref. Read more about the Metadata Manager position and consider applying yourself!