Another Word For It Patrick Durusau on Topic Maps and Semantic Diversity

January 4, 2014

…The re3data.org Registry

Filed under: Data,Data Repositories — Patrick Durusau @ 5:15 pm

Making Research Data Repositories Visible: The re3data.org Registry by Heinz Pampel, et. al.

Abstract:

Researchers require infrastructures that ensure a maximum of accessibility, stability and reliability to facilitate working with and sharing of research data. Such infrastructures are being increasingly summarized under the term Research Data Repositories (RDR). The project re3data.org–Registry of Research Data Repositories–has begun to index research data repositories in 2012 and offers researchers, funding organizations, libraries and publishers an overview of the heterogeneous research data repository landscape. In July 2013 re3data.org lists 400 research data repositories and counting. 288 of these are described in detail using the re3data.org vocabulary. Information icons help researchers to easily identify an adequate repository for the storage and reuse of their data. This article describes the heterogeneous RDR landscape and presents a typology of institutional, disciplinary, multidisciplinary and project-specific RDR. Further the article outlines the features of re3data.org, and shows how this registry helps to identify appropriate repositories for storage and search of research data.

A great summary of progress so far but pay close attention to:

In the following, the term research data is defined as digital data being a (descriptive) part or the result of a research process. This process covers all stages of research, ranging from research data generation, which may be in an experiment in the sciences, an empirical study in the social sciences or observations of cultural phenomena, to the publication of research results. Digital research data occur in different data types, levels of aggregation and data formats, informed by the research disciplines and their methods. With regards to the purpose of access for use and re-use of research data, digital research data are of no value without their metadata and proper documentation describing their context and the tools used to create, store, adapt, and analyze them [7]. (emphasis added)

If you think about that for a moment you will realize that should include all the “metadata and proper documentation …. and the tools….” The need for explanation does not go away because of the label “metadata” or “documentation.”

Not that we can ever avoid semantic opaqueness but depending on the value of the data, we can push it further away in some cases than others.

An article that will repay a close reading.

I first saw this in a tweet by Stuart Buck.

No Comments

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Powered by WordPress