There is a fundamental choice regarding representing researcher identifiers in LDAP entries and SAML attribute assertions:

1. Craft per-issuer attributes, appropriately named, for example:
   1. eduPersonOrcid (http://orcid.org/ )
   2. eduPersonScopusId (http://www.elsevier.com/online-tools/scopus )
   3. eduPersonProfilesRnsId (http://profiles.catalyst.harvard.edu/ )
   4. add to this list
   5. Prefix "eduPerson" to the attribute name or not (e.g., eduPersonOrcid or just orcid)
2. Create a generic attribute for researcher identifiers
   1. For example, create "eduPersonResearcherId" 
   2. Then decide how to indicate the issuer for each of the values
      1. the traditional eduPerson way would be to create a string with the raw identifier value, append "@" followed by a standardized string per issuer
         1. e.g., http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3174-899X@orcid; 77863@profilesRns; 15737449500@scopus
      2. other conventions
         1. See, for example, Roland Hedberg email "Re: [refeds] ORCID attribute?"
            1. urn:schac:personalUniqueId:int:orcidID:xyz

Issues and tradeoffs of proposed approaches

• ORCID CTO: "ORCID prefers the use of a URI to describe the ORCID iD - http://orcid.org/xxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxx"
• If we opt to indicate issue via ...@issuer, we buy into maintaining a registry of issuer identifiers; That is one cost of the approach
• Come up with a lightweight process that allows us to create "experimental" new attributes. One key would be a lightweight method of requesting and issuing OIDs in the eduPerson attribute OID arc for proposed and experimental attributes