Updating Person Name Convention

[lomky]

Our current convention for figuring our which name for use for a Persons is due for an update.

Our Current convention

If an NCA3 authors, use what is used there
else: if Health Assessment author, use what is there
else: the most complete formal name used in a GCIS publication

My suggestion for the convention is as follows:

1. If the author provides us with their preferred name and their OrcID, use the provided name.
   1. We could only use custom name requests if they give us the OrcID to connect them with their publications moving forward
2. Use the authors name as it appears on our Quadrennial Assessments or their supporting report, starting with our most recent release and moving backwards.
   1. for example, as of 2017-02 we would consider:
      1. the CSSR
      2. the Health Assessment
      3. NCA3
      4. NCA2
      5. NCA1
3. Use the author's name as it appears in any other USGCRP publication.
   1. i.e. Strategic Plan, Our Changing Planet, etc.
4. Use the author's name as it appears on their OrcID profile
   1. this can be done in an automated manner, skipping those that fit one of the above categories and naming the others accordingly.
5. Final fallback: any official name we can find (author's website, facebook, researchgate, outside articles, etc).

Drawbacks:

• Option 1 (custom name) and Option 4 (source from OrcID) both rely on the author having an OrcID they have told us.
• Minor increase in level of effort creating the Persons when we publish a report

[rasherman]

I think this is fine, but would just add that in the unlikely case when going down the list there are still multiple answers (e.g. we get to option 3 and they listed their names differently in 2 different USGCRP documents), we choose the most complete formal name of those.