A presentation by Marilena Daquino, Silvio Peroni and David Shotton, at Open Science Fair 2019.
Category Archives: oa.metadata
OASPA and the Initiative for Open Citations – OASPA
“One of the goals of OASPA is to support the transition to a world in which open access becomes the predominant mode of publication. As we have charted in the annual statistics on the growth of open content published using various Creative Commons licenses, steady progress is being made (see for example the most recent update). We are now introducing a new membership requirement for OASPA to increase openness, specifically of citation data.
Another area where publishers have helped to make progress towards greater openness is in the provision of metadata. Many members of OASPA already deposit metadata with Crossref and make this data openly available. There are good reasons for publishers to do this – it can help with the discoverability of content whether it is open access or behind subscription barriers. To find out whether a particular publisher deposits metadata and makes those data available, Crossref has introduced a service called Participation Reports (example here)….”
OASPA and the Initiative for Open Citations – OASPA
“One of the goals of OASPA is to support the transition to a world in which open access becomes the predominant mode of publication. As we have charted in the annual statistics on the growth of open content published using various Creative Commons licenses, steady progress is being made (see for example the most recent update). We are now introducing a new membership requirement for OASPA to increase openness, specifically of citation data.
Another area where publishers have helped to make progress towards greater openness is in the provision of metadata. Many members of OASPA already deposit metadata with Crossref and make this data openly available. There are good reasons for publishers to do this – it can help with the discoverability of content whether it is open access or behind subscription barriers. To find out whether a particular publisher deposits metadata and makes those data available, Crossref has introduced a service called Participation Reports (example here)….”
Workflows Allowing Creation of Journal Article Supporting Information and Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable (FAIR)-Enabled Publication of Spectroscopic Data | ACS Omega
Abstract: There is an increasing focus on the part of academic institutions, funding agencies, and publishers, if not researchers themselves, on preservation and sharing of research data. Motivations for sharing include research integrity, replicability, and reuse. One of the barriers to publishing data is the extra work involved in preparing data for publication once a journal article and its supporting information have been completed. In this work, a method is described to generate both human and machine-readable supporting information directly from the primary instrumental data files and to generate the metadata to ensure it is published in accordance with findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable (FAIR) guidelines. Using this approach, both the human readable supporting information and the primary (raw) data can be submitted simultaneously with little extra effort. Although traditionally the data package would be sent to a journal publisher for publication alongside the article, the data package could also be published independently in an institutional FAIR data repository. Workflows are described that store the data packages and generate metadata appropriate for such a repository. The methods both to generate and to publish the data packages have been implemented for NMR data, but the concept is extensible to other types of spectroscopic data as well.
[1904.06052] COCI, the OpenCitations Index of Crossref open DOI-to-DOI citations
Abstract: In this paper, we present COCI, the OpenCitations Index of Crossref open DOI-to-DOI citations (this http URL). COCI is the first open citation index created by OpenCitations, in which we have applied the concept of citations as first-class data entities, and it contains more than 445 million DOI-to-DOI citation links derived from the data available in Crossref. These citations are described in RDF by means of the newly extended version of the OpenCitations Data Model (OCDM). We introduce the workflow we have developed for creating these data, and also show the additional services that facilitate the access to and querying of these data via different access points: a SPARQL endpoint, a REST API, bulk downloads, Web interfaces, and direct access to the citations via HTTP content negotiation. Finally, we present statistics regarding the use of COCI citation data, and we introduce several projects that have already started to use COCI data for different purposes.
The future of academic publishing: disruption, opportunity and a new ecosystem – Barbour – 2019 – Medical Journal of Australia – Wiley Online Library
“But probably the most urgent question for many people who read and publish in journals is where do these journals, especially journals that operate under the subscription model, fit into this future? Crucially, any ideal future system will need to encompass a diverse range of possible solutions, technically and financially. Journals of all types will have their place, as will pre?print servers, data repositories, registries of trials and other studies, and repository systems maintained by libraries and other organisations. Essentially, the entire set of current components can be fitted into a remodelled system, provided they are able to support specific principles — maybe the FAIR principles, but perhaps other community?agreed principles will arise. The onus at this time is for publishers to look carefully at each of their journals and to develop plans that will support open scholarship now and into the future. However, at the same time as journals and publishers respond to the changing world, there needs to be a concerted program of education and support for everyone involved in publishing, especially readers and authors, on the wholesale changes now occurring….”
The Data Curation Network – A shared staffing model for digital data repositories
“As professional data curators, research data librarians, academic library administrators, directors of international data repositories, disciplinary subject experts, and scholars we represent academic institutions and non-profit societies that make research data available to the public….
Data curators prepare and enrich research data to make them findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable (FAIR). Sharing our data curation staff across DCN partner institutions enables data repositories to collectively, and more effectively, curate a wider variety of data types (e.g., discipline, file format, etc.) that expands beyond what any single institution might offer alone….”
Data Curation Network Makes More Research Data Available to All – Association of Research Libraries
“Research data has the most impact when other researchers and the public can find it and use it to build upon the original researcher’s findings.
Researchers struggle with sharing their data in ways that make it findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable (FAIR). Depositing their data in a repository is only part of the solution.
Data curators are employed by repositories to enrich research data, making the data FAIR through such activities as authentication, archiving, metadata creation, and digital preservation….
But each repository alone cannot supply all the expertise needed to curate the wide variety of data types and discipline-specific data formats it contains, such as spatial data, computer code, databases, chemical spectra, 3-D images, and genomic sequencing data.
To cooperatively, and more effectively, curate all types of research data the Data Curation Network shares staff among participating repositories. The network also expands the skills of data curators and shares best practices by providing free workshops for librarians, curators, and archivists and by developing community resources, such as curation checklists, primers, and workshop content….”
A literature review of scholarly communications metadata
Abstract: The purpose of this literature review is to identify the challenges, opportunities, and gaps in knowledge with regard to the use of metadata in scholarly communications. This paper compiles and interprets literature in sections based on the professional groups, or stakeholders, within scholarly communications metadata: researchers, funders, publishers, librarians, service providers, and data curators. It then ends with a ‘bird’s eye view’ of the metadata supply chain which presents the network of relationships and interdependencies between stakeholders. This paper seeks to lay the groundwork for new approaches to present problems in scholarly communications metadata.
Implementing a data policy: a how-to guide for publishers – OASPA
“To bring some order to this wealth of information, we suggest several rules of thumb:
Encourage the use of persistent identifiers or PIDs (for example, DOIs for datasets, ORCIDs for authors, RRIDs for reagents – more information here)
Engage with journal editors, learned societies and other domain leaders to benchmark where a specific subject or community is comfortable in terms of encouraging, expecting or mandating open data practices. You could use the RDA policy framework as the outline for the conversation.
It is preferable to upload data to a repository, and include a link within a research article, rather than hosting via a supplementary material facility.
Sometimes data do need to be kept closed, but this doesn’t need to be the default situation. Ask the researcher/author why should it be closed rather than why should it be open.
Have some information (metadata) in front of any paywall to point to where underlying data can be found. See the following examples: …”