I’ve just read your blog post about the switch from Funder Registry to ROR. I’m working on the quality of funding metadata available on the web, particularly for Grants. So I’d like to know whether this transition to ROR PID will have an impact on Grants DOIs and the metadata of these DOI.
@Ceanne.B Hi Ceanne! So glad you asked. The short answer is yes, this transition will have an effect – we think a positive one – on the metadata of Crossref Grant DOIs. Eventually (meaning in or after 2025), Crossref will encourage the use of ROR IDs instead of Funder IDs to identify the funder in Grant DOIs. This should be easier for funders registering Grant DOIs, because they’ll be able to use ROR IDs both to identify the funder (themselves) and to identify the organizations the investigators are affiliated with.
Here’s an example. The American Cancer Society has registered a grant at Award Details. The metadata for this grant is available at http://api.crossref.org/works/10.53354/pc.gr.151103 – if you can see it, you’ll see that the American Cancer Society is currently identified with a Funder DOI: https://doi.org/10.13039/100000048. After this transition, the American Cancer Society will be identified with a ROR ID: https://ror.org/02e463172
We think this will be a benefit to everyone because it will allow the use of a single registry instead of two, and because funders can more easily see their identifying records and request changes at https://ror.org/search.
Note as well the point from the announcement that “Legacy Funder IDs and their mapping to ROR IDs will be maintained, so if Crossref members submit a legacy Funder ID, it will get mapped to a ROR ID automatically. Note, too, that Crossref is committed to maintaining the current funder API endpoints until ROR IDs become the predominant identifier for newly registered content.”
Does that answer your question? You can book a meeting with me if you like to discuss it further: Calendly - Amanda French