Scopus is "off side"

At Wikidata we have all kinds of identifiers for all kinds of subjects. All of them aim to provide unique identifiers and the value of Wikidata is that it brings them together; allowing to combine the information of multiple sources about the same subject.

Scientists may have a Scopus identifier. In Wikidata Scopus is very much a second rate system because to learn what identifiers goes with what people requires jumping through proprietary hoops. Scopus is the pay wall, it has its own advertising budget and consequently it does not need the effort of me and volunteers like me to put the spotlight on the science it holds for ransom. When we come across Scopus identifiers we  include them but Scopus identifiers are second class citizens.

At Wikipedia we have been blind sighted by scientists who gained awards, became instant sensations because of their accomplishments. For me this is largely the effect of us not knowing who they are, their work. Thanks to ORCiD, we increasingly know about more and more scientists and their work. When we don't know of them, when their work is hidden from the real world, I don't mind. When we know about them and their work in Wikidata it is different. It is when we could/should know their notability.
Thanks,
      GerardM

The name is Bon, James Bon

Santhosh is one of the special agents in the fight to bring language support to the Internet. Identifying him in English is easy; all the characters used to transliterate സന്തോഷ് തോട്ടിങ്ങല്‍ are available to identify Santhosh for who he is.

The last character in his name is the "zwj". According to some, this character is not available for identification purposes. Without the "zwj", the name looks different:

• സന്തോഷ് തോട്ടിങ്ങല്‍
• സന്തോഷ് തോട്ടിങ്ങല്

Santhosh is a Malayalam name and for Malayalam there is an alternative way of writing Unicode. So technically it is possible to transliterate the "zwj" out of his name for Malayalam.

It becomes more interesting when you write Sri Lankha in Singhala. this cannot be done without a "zwj". From a Wikimedia Foundation point of view, the Unicode report "Unicode Identifier and Pattern Syntax" assumes for many languages that they are "aspirational" or "limited" use, is not really workable. Our aim is to have support for all scripts and identifying people by their name; their real name.

As we do identify people, an implementation of this Unicode specification is important to us. Having people like Mr തോട്ടിങ്ങല്‍ in the drivers seat will surely get us a best result. It may even get us a reference implementation.
Thanks,
       GerardM

Trusted identities on the Internet .. #NSTIC

On a White house blog the NSTIC or National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace is announced. As I understand it, it is to help people manage their identities on the Internet. This first draft of NSTIC was developed in collaboration with key government agencies, business leaders and privacy advocates.

The need to manage your identities starts with being able to manage your password and being the owner of data about you. For me this means that I am the one who decides what information is given to whom.

Even though the need is obvious, I do not want to make Google, Facebook or any business leader the host of my data. At that I prefer for instance the Wikimedia Foundation.

The WMF hosts many international communities, it has policies that aim to protect its users. In many discussions there is talk of a Wiki movement, this is the time to quickly take the initiative and provide a socially acceptable service to manage our identities.
Thanks,
     GerardM