February 7, 2017 – draft for public comment
Public comments are open from February 7 – March 3, 2017
In April 2016, the Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR) launched a working group to help identify new functionalities and technologies for repositories and develop a road map for their adoption. For the past several months, the group has been working to define a vision for repositories and sketch out the priority user stories and scenarios that will help guide the development of new functionalities.
The vision is to position repositories as the foundation for a distributed, globally networked infrastructure for scholarly communication, on top of which layers of value added services will be deployed, thereby transforming the system, making it more research-centric, open to and supportive of innovation, while also collectively managed by the scholarly community.
Underlying this vision is the idea that a distributed network of repositories can and should be a powerful tool to promote the transformation of the scholarly communication ecosystem. In this context, repositories will provide access to published articles as well as a broad range of artifacts beyond traditional publications such as datasets, pre-prints, working papers, images, software, and so on.
The working group presents 12 user stories that outline priority functionalities for repositories.
Please contribute your ideas and opinions using the commenting function of the website!
The ICSU World Data System (WDS) and the Data Seal of Approval (DSA) Board announce the availability of the first version of their universal and unified “Core Trustworthy Data Repository Requirements.” The DSA Board and the WDS Scientific Committee are working together to further align their certification procedures and ensure that the research community will have a single, clear reference point for seeking Core Trustworthy Data Repository certification.
An Introduction to the Core Trustworthy Data Repositories Requirements
Core Trustworthy Data Repositories Requirements
Examining landscapes of research data management services in academic libraries is timely and significant for both those libraries on the front line and the libraries that are already ahead. While it provides overall understanding of where the research data management program is at and where it is going, it also provides understanding of current practices and data management recommendations and/or tool adoptions as well as reveals areas of improvement and support.
This study examined the research data (management) services in academic libraries in the United States through a content analysis of 185 library websites, with four main areas of focus: service, information, education, and network. The results from the content analysis of these webpages reveals that libraries need to advance and engage more actively to provide services, provide information online, and develop educational services. There is also a wide variation among library data management services and programs according to their web presence.
At a NeDICC meeting held on 18 February 2016, four NeDICC member institutions shared their RDM progress with the rest of NeDICC. The presentations can be accessed below:
RDM progress update: UCT
RDM progress update: UWC
RDM progress update: UNISA
RDM progress update: CSIR
The ‘National level’ Data Management Planning tool is ready for testing by a wider community. It currently contains DMPs for a couple of international funders as well as the DCC generic DMP.
The testing phase DMP can be accessed at the following url:
Feel free to test the DMP, share the link far and wide, and provide feedback.
CODATA: The South Africa Data Citation Workshop, named “Data citation as a catalyst for good RDM practices”, was held on the 10th December 2015 at the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), Knowledge Commons building (Ulwazi), Pretoria, South Africa.
|Science as an open enterprise – looking at the wider context for research data management (RDM) as well as Open Science
||Prof Colin Wright,
Department of Science & Technology
|The international drive and importance of data citation. RDA Task group as well as any other relevant international initiatives
Executive Director of CODATA
|CODATA Data Citation Task Team & its outputs: The citation principles developed
|Martie van Deventer, CODATA Data Citation Task Team Member
|Research using public funding: The South African case – (a) NRF Open Access Statement, (b) Requirements to be met
|Daisy Selematsela, Executive Director: KMC
|NeDICC – Its role and plans for 2016
||Lucia Lötter, Chairperson: NeDICC
|DIRISA Progress & function/role – (a) Repository certification: A network of trusted data repositories for South Africa; (b) DIRISA repository; (c) Encouraging good research practice – also for proper citation; (d) National digital object identifier infrastructure; (e) Researcher IDs
||Anwar Vahed, Manager: DIRISA
|“$100 is not much to you”: Unseen Barriers in Open Science
||Louise Bezuidenhout University of Exeter and WITS
|Workshop discussion: Data citation Concerns, success stories Will data citation really be seen as a reward for the proper management of research data?
| Workshop discussion: Shared language / Jargon Clarification of terms (some examples) Ownership/ Management/ Stewardship Persistent identifiers Open, Embargoed and Restricted access Data center, Preservation DMP / RDM / RDA
|Workshop discussion: Roles and responsibilities The RDM role and responsibility of each of the following: Funders; Research offices / officers; Libraries; Ethics committees; IP / Licensing office; The researchers; and the Role / responsibility for a data center
|Roadmap session 1: A proposed national repository: Institutions have three options when making their research data accessible – (a) Establish your own managed data repository;
(b) Make use of an established subject / domain repository; or (c) Use DIRISA’s repository (prototype will be demonstrated)
• Join the planning and development team … Contribute to the requirements document for the repository (including the citation reference/ protocol) and preservation management & infrastructure.
• Ensure that all repositories could be harvested to allow for a national ‘register’ of South African data sets.
Isak van der Walt
|Roadmap session 2: A proposed national DMP tool. Institutions could implement/ develop their own Data Management Planning (DMP) tools or collaborate and make use of a reliable national resource.
• RDM Plans – what are the funder requirements
• Specify the requirements for a national initiative.
Johann van Wyk
Isak vd Walt