Domain repositories build strong communities of people and organizations that contribute data, expertise and scientific results. These communities thrive on active connections between data, papers, people, and organizations. Multiple contributions and real-world connections make domain repositories great places for adoption of identifiers and virtual connections that build the PID graph.
We are thrilled to announce that Metadata Game Changers is partnering with Openscapes, housed at the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis on a new NASA-funded, three year project!
Measuring metadata completeness is a great way to identify good examples and low-hanging fruit for improvement. A Pidapalloza talk from last week described results from a recent assessment of 144 repositories from the TIB DataCite Consortium with respect to recommendations for FAIR metadata. Overall, the seven mandatory DataCite fields dominate these repositories, but several great examples that go beyond the mandatory were identified.
In honor of PIDapalooza 2021 and 25 hours of Persistent Identifier discussion happening today, we thought a post celebrating the power of PIDs for increasing connectivity and how to measure that connectivity is in order. Let’s party on 🥳 Discovery Before Conectivity (BC) : For many years we have thought about discovery in terms of web portals with text search boxes, maps, timelines, facets, or some other kind of interface.
It has been ten years since the release of the first DataCite metadata schema. Many improvements since then provide a roadmap for community evolution toward making DataCite metadata more FAIR.
The road to complete and consistent metadata can be long and arduous – digging through piles of metadata and other kinds of data to find small gems of information that can be added to metadata records, contacting recalcitrant researchers to fill in blanks, slowly building content across a collection… Does it really need to be that hard?
Looking for New Year’s metadata resolutions? How about: Stop using sentences that include the words “minimum metadata” without specifying a use case. Sentences that include the words “minimum metadata” come up frequently in metadata discussions, usually in the context of what a data provider wants to provide or, even more common, in the context of what should be expected of them.
DataCite subject metadata can play an important role in dataset classification and discovery, but these elements are uncommon in the repository and need some improvements. Establishing metrics for completeness and quality is an important first step in the improvement process.
Non-unique organizations and acronyms can cause problems in ROR searches. Use supporting information if you have it to get better results. If not, beware of theses gotchas.
Let’s recognize leaders in the adoption of organizational identifiers in DataCite metadata. They are making tracks for us to follow!
Adopting organizational identifiers (RORs) in existing metadata may not be as hard as we think for DataCite members that only have a few affiliations in their metadata. However, even in these cases, some challenges remain.