1. GEDE Focus Area Repositories - motivation -
Peter Wittenburg

2. PID Focus Area Successful
many differing documents about PIDs - confusing for communities
all communities suggested key documents (about 30) for this topic
all documents have been studied and transformed in to 61 essential assertions
these assertions were aggregated, grouped and compared
documents from expert organisations/initiatives were also included
results:
clarification of many uncertainties and terminology across communities
detecting agreement on core messages if wording differences are ignored
some ongoing discussions on usage aspects (granularity, versioning, etc.)
GEDE Focus Group is very important to overcome barriers and confusions
GEDE Focus Group helped to turn to action

3. Repository Focus Area - What are repositories?
store and give access to data and metadata via standard protocols
may give services on top of the stored data (products)
have a team that does data management and stewardship on stored data
activities are guided by openly described policies and procedures
take care of long-term preservation of data and metadata
take care that schemas and concepts being used are registered
register themselves in repository registries such as re3data
trustworthy repositories are key pillars of our emerging data infrastructure
they are trustworthy if they participate in regular quality assessments according to widely accepted standards (DSA/WDS)
it is the task of the certification standards to include essentials (long term funding, etc.)

4. Repository Focus Area - What are registries?
registries also store and give access to data via standard protocols
is there a difference?
from an IT perspective the difference is in functions and roles
in general registries do not store the resources (data) but aggregate metadata about data
there is a wide variety of metadata types and thus registries
registries have a team that takes care of proper management of metadata
activities of registries are guided by openly described policies and procedures
registries take care that schemas and concepts being used are registered
registires should be findable and thus be registered
trustworthy registries are key pillars of our emerging data infrastructure
they are trustworthy if they participate in regular quality assessments

5. Repository Focus Area - How are repositories organised?
repositories can be organised as discipline specific entities with deep knowledge about the discipline or domain
repositories can be organised according to organisational boundaries (institutes, research organisations, countries, etc.)
repositories can be organised according to commercial interests
metadata should be open and free to use
they may give access to data requesting to sign a license, to describe the intended use, to adhere to ethical and rights norms, to pay a certain fee, etc.
increasingly often repositories are part of a number of trust federations

6. Repository Focus Area - What are the open Questions?
what are the requirements, tasks and roles in the different communities?
are there special functional needs?
what are the typical policies and procedures being applied?
can we specify ONE generic API to repositories?
do all repositories need to participate in quality assessment procedures?
what is the status of data of not certified repositories?
is there typical software that can be recommended?
which standards are out there describing the characteristics of repositories?

7. Repository Focus Area - why topic in GEDE
there are a few RDA groups working on matters related with repositories
do they have a comprehensive picture about the view on repositories in the different communities - if not can GEDE contribute to improve their results
there are already good recommendations and best-practices to be disseminated between research infrastructures
there could be certification needs that go beyond DSA/WDS rules
there could be an exchange of policies and procedures between the communities and also the RDA Practical Policy group
specific training sessions on this topic can be organised
standard software installations could be discussed (such as OAI-PMH, etc.)

8. Data Citation landscape need clarification A potential GEDE topic
Carlo Maria Zwölf
VAMDC e-infrastructure

9. Persistent Identifiers and data citation/publication
The initial GEDE activity was focused on Persistent Identifiers (PIDs) bundle
We converged on a wide consensus set of statements
PIDs are a key element for stable data referencing
PIDs are a fundamental building block for data citation mechanisms
The road linking PIDs with data citation/publication is not direct:
The data citation landscape
is highly fragmented (several standards & platform exist).
Rapidly changes (new standards appears, some platforms disappear, new ones arrive)
Orientation may be difficult for data producers, providers and consumers

10. The data citation/publication landscape
Data citation and publication are two faces of the same coin:
One cite published (in the sense of reachable) material
Since some material is published, it can be referred to

11. The data citation/publication landscape
Data citation and publication are two faces of the same coin:
One cite published (in the sense of reachable) material
Since some material is published, it can be referred to
Data Citation Working group (
RDA
RDA/WDS Publishing Data Services WG (
ICSU / WDS
Joint declaration of Data Citation Principle (WDS/Force11) (
Existing Recommendations
and best practices landscape
Force 11
Force11 data citation Manifesto (
Codata
CODATA-ICSTI Data citation Standards and Practices (

12. The data citation/publication landscape
Data citation and publication are two faces of the same coin:
One cite published (in the sense of reachable) material
Since some material is published, it can be referred to
Data Cite (
Assign DOI
Zenodo (
EUDAT
( )
Existing platforms and services for
data citation/publication
OpenAire (
The Dataverse project
( former thedata.org)
Scholix (

13. The data citation/publication landscape
Data citation and publication are two faces of the same coin:
One cite published (in the sense of reachable) material
Since some material is published, it can be referred to
Data Cite (
Zenodo (
EUDAT
( )
May be based on the recalled recommendations
Existing platforms and services for
data citation/publication
OpenAire (
The Dataverse project
( former thedata.org)
Scholix (

14. A disoriented community
Data citation/publication recommendations
Data citation/publication services and platforms ? ? ? ? ? ?
Users and data providers communities

15. A disoriented community
Data citation/publication recommendations
Data citation/publication services and platforms ? ? ? ? ? ?
Users and data providers communities
A true (very recent) story
Very known editor
EU e-infrastructure

16. A disoriented community
Data citation/publication recommendations
Data citation/publication services and platforms ? ? ? ? ? ?
Users and data providers communities
A true (very recent) story
We would like to cite your data. What could you propose?
Very known editor
EU e-infrastructure

17. A disoriented community
Data citation/publication recommendations
Data citation/publication services and platforms ? ? ? ? ? ?
Users and data providers communities
A true (very recent) story
We have implemented the RDA recommendation on citation of dynamic data…
Very known editor
EU e-infrastructure

18. A disoriented community
Data citation/publication recommendations
Data citation/publication services and platforms ? ? ? ? ? ?
Users and data providers communities
A true (very recent) story
What about using Scholix instead?
Very known editor
EU e-infrastructure

19. A disoriented community
Data citation/publication recommendations
Data citation/publication services and platforms ? ? ? ? ? ?
Users and data providers communities
A true (very recent) story …
Very known editor
EU e-infrastructure

20. A suggestion for the next GEDE activity
The data citation “wild” context is similar to the PIDs one
In the PIDs context GEDE succeeded in clearing up the confusion
By summarizing
Existing solutions and best practices
By clustering
A similar rationalization work may be done for data-citation fragmented landscape
It is a logical continuity of the PIDs work
It will answer a real urgent need

21. Versioning of data - in support of FAIRness and trustability
Maggie Hellström
ICOS Carbon Portal

22. Why version stuff? W3C document “Data on the Web Best Practices” says:
data sets may change over time
new data is appended (in time or space)
some old data no longer relevant
error(s) discovered & fixed
no consensus on when changes
constitute a new version (major or minor) of existing data set
a new data set should be defined
who is responsible
maintaining trust and reusability requires
consistent approach to versioning
clear information
metadata pointers (‘is-deprecated’, ‘is-replaced-by’, ‘replaces’...
(from 31 January 2017)

23. Recent RDA discussions
Proposed interest group (IG) on data versioning
discussions started at P8 (Denver) & continued at P9 (Barcelona)
Current effort led by Lesley Wyborn & Jens Klump
Example use cases
Australia: large remote sensing & geospatial datasets; “composites” of numerous (tiled) sources. If a (small) subset is updated, how to best describe this?
USA: NASA’s Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center (SEDAC)

24. Related initiatives RDA Data Citation WG RDA Data Collection WG
Dynamic data
Query-centered approach: store actual queries together with timestamp information, and PID them
RDA Data Collection WG
Collection objects can be used to point to “dynamic” datasets that belong together
Collections can themselves be versionable
EUDAT/RDA/COOPEUS:
Identification & citation of open-ended data, subsets

25. What can GEDE do? Survey European RIs
current needs & requirements
applied practices
available support from e-services
Investigate global efforts (search white & gray literature)
Gather concrete use cases
already defined via RDA groups
new ones