Vocabulary to describe Research Data Repositories online

The first draft of the re3data.org vocabulary to describe research data repositories and its documentation is online (version 1.0). The vocabulary will be used to index research data repositories gathering issues such as:

  • general information (e.g. subject)
  • information on the provider (e.g. responsible institutions)
  • information on legal aspects (e.g. licenses)
  • information on technical, metadata and quality standards (e.g. software, api and certificates).

The existing vocabulary was developed out of 20 randomly chosen repositories of a survey of 400 research data repositories. These findings as well as suggestions from project partners have led to the current and preliminary version 1.0. Future developments of the vocabulary will also depend on the feedback of the research data repository community. This open and transparent development process is to ensure a strong basis for a future standard for describing research data repositories supported by and rooted in the community. Taking all responses into account the preliminary version 1.0 will be updated to 1.1 and published in autumn 2012. We appreciate your feedback and therefore would like to invite you to tell us what you think about our work done so far.

3 thoughts on “Vocabulary to describe Research Data Repositories online

  1. I was wondering how management of institutions over time would be handled? The vocab expresses both the concepts of institutions and time, but each record has a unique number. So what would happen if the repository stayed live but the owner changed? This could be by the owner changing name, or a different organisation taking over.
    Secondly I wondered about the type of repository? Are you saying that subject and institutional are not an overlapping set? What happens about funder repositories? These are not necessarily the same as subject repositories. If I can be so bold as to point to some work I was responsible for SIRIS http://ie-repository.jisc.ac.uk/259/ this discussed different types of publication respository and I think the same and more so would apply to research data.

    • Dear Catherine, thanks for your comments.

      Concerning the management of institutions over time, it is possible for repository managers to name several institutions (since the occurence of property 17 is 1-n). Moreover properties 17.7 and 17.8 can be used to indicate the period of responsibility.

      As for the type of repository we thank you for pointing out your work in SIRIS. We will re-use your entire definition of an institutional repository. We will use almost all aspects of the definition of a disciplinary repository. Based on our experience of indexing research data repositories we assume that there is just a small number of funder repositories. Funder repositories will be included in the category of “other” types of research data repositories. In our view the traits of institutional and disciplinary repositories do not exclude each other so that a research data repository could be labeled both.

      Thanks again for your help. Cheers, your re3data.org team

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>