Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

  • Accessible

    • Data and metadata protocols are open and free

    • The researcher defines level of access in data repository

      • Perhaps as part of the “Publishing data in a data repository“ scenario?

    • Restricted access for sensitive data

      • Perhaps as part of the “Publishing data in a data repository“ scenario?

    • Metadata records will remain accessible, even when the data is no longer available (FDP & RDR)

  • Interoperable

    • Interoperability aspects of the metadata are addressed by the FDP

    • RDF, FAIR-compliant vocabularies, including references to other metadata (e.g., PID for organisations [ROR] and people [ORCID])

    • Data model will be defined

      • Could be another scenario

      • Are we talking semantic modelling here? Including triple store etc? That could indeed be another scenario

  • Reusable

    • The researcher provides all relevant documentation needed to understand the data, such as the study protocol, data dictionary, syntax etc.

      • Provides where? (and perhaps to whom?)

    • The researcher refers to a reuse license in the metadata

      • Preferably machine-readable

      • License is in the core metadata schema. We could maybe add it as an example for 3a.

      • We could even create a scenario about filling in the metadata schema, if relevant?

        • Part of the scenario could be: she refers to a machine-readable license (not sure how that works/how to do this, so could be interesting)

    • The researcher complies with community standards

      • Use or define FAIR Implementation Profile

        • tbd

 

Alternative Flow

Description

Conditions

Researcher perspective

Alternative Flow