I would also like to advocate for ORCiD because it has become generally accepted by researchers and publishers. The data comes either from the researchers in BibTeX format or from various sources. The researchers can allow data exchange with creditable sources such as crossref or scopus. Therefore, there may be data from several sources for 1 entry. But the page "owner" has to define a "preferred source". The data may not be perfect. But the researchers have an interest to collect their data centrally in ORCiD because ORCiD can be connected for import and export of data to an increasing number of ORCiD partners. Moreover, most scientific journals now offer to include links to the author's ORCiD ID. Therefore, it feels natural to export from ORCiD to BibBase.
I would also like to advocate for ORCiD because it has become generally accepted by researchers and publishers. The data comes either from the researchers in BibTeX format or from various sources. The researchers can allow data exchange with creditable sources such as crossref or scopus. Therefore, there may be data from several sources for 1 entry. But the page "owner" has to define a "preferred source". The data may not be perfect. But the researchers have an interest to collect their data centrally in ORCiD because ORCiD can be connected for import and export of data to an increasing number of ORCiD partners. Moreover, most scientific journals now offer to include links to the author's ORCiD ID. Therefore, it feels natural to export from ORCiD to BibBase.