Skip to main content


We are in the process of rolling out a soft launch of the RDA website, which includes a new member platform. Existing RDA members PLEASE REACTIVATE YOUR ACCOUNT using this link: Visitors may encounter functionality issues with group pages, navigation, missing content, broken links, etc. As you explore the new site, please provide your feedback using the UserSnap tool on the bottom right corner of each page. Thank you for your understanding and support as we work through all issues as quickly as possible. Stay updated about upcoming features and functionalities:


RDA Admin

To me the issue is not that there are two properties that are each other’s inverse, like schema:subjectOf and schema:about, but that there is one property schema:citation that is used in two different ways, not even with an inverse relationship. One meaning is to point from one thing to another (in line with the definition ), the other one, from the Dataset example, to say something like “use this in combination with that” which is completely different.
In my mind, if “A schema:citation B” means “A cites or references B”, then the statement “DatasetD schema:citation ArticleX” can only mean “DatasetD cites or references ArticleX” and nothing else. Otherwise, one would allow the meaning of the property to change based on the type of thing it is applied to.
By the way, I cannot find the property ‘references’ in It is in Dublin Core, which also has its inverse ‘isReferencedBy’.
From: Robert Casey
Sent: 03 February 2020 19:11
To: ***@***.***
Cc: Makx Dekkers ; Research Metadata Schemas WG
Subject: Re: [rda-research-schemas-wg] citation property in Dataset
Interesting discussion. This sounds like the issue relating to ‘s current recommendations for Metadata, where there are two different terms used depending on the direction of reference, but the reference is nonetheless bidirectional:
Linking Metadata docs to Datasets: Use schema:subjectOf or schema:about
or inversely
Could we consider using the terms ‘Citations’ and ‘References’ as directionally opposite in the same manner? Or perhaps there’s a better term.
On Feb 3, 2020, at 6:40 AM, ljgarcia via Research Metadata Schemas WG wrote:
Hi all,
It is indeed confusing. I have added a comment to an open schemaorg issue in GitHub:
Please have a look to contribute to the discussion as you see it fits. Hopefully @danbri will reply to it.
On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 1:29 PM makxdekkers via Research Metadata Schemas WG wrote:
If I understand correctly, sdo:citation is being used here in the sense of “is supplementary material for”. If this is the semantic meaning of sdo:citation, it is a bit different from the usual meaning of citation.
Usually, I would expect citation to be one-way: ArticleA cites ArticleB.
But in the meaning implied by the Dataset guidelines, both the following statements would be valid:
ArticleA sdo:citation DatasetD (the usual meaning: the article cites the dataset)
DatasetD sdo:citation ArticleA (the additional meaning: the dataset requires the ar ticle to be cited alongside the dataset)
I find this confusing.
From: ***@***.***
Sent: 03 February 2020 12:04
To: LJ.Garcia ; Research Metadata Schemas WG
Cc: Adam Shepherd
Subject: Re: [rda-research-schemas-wg] citation property in Dataset
Yes Leyla, this is what I understand as well. The google guidelines is consistent with the definition of citation from the :
On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 11:43 PM Adam Shepherd wrote:
I agree with you, Leyla
On Jan 13, 2020, at 3:57 AM, ljgarcia via Research Metadata Schemas WG wrote:

Dear all,
During our last meeting we discussed what seems to be contradictory information on the Google guidelines regarding the Dataset type (
After reading that doc ument again, I think there is no contradiction there. Let’s suppose we have a dataset named “OurDataset” where AA, BB, CC and DD have contributed and we have a paper about that dataset titled “OurDataset, integrating omics data” with only AA as author.
What Google recommends is something like:
“OurDataset” object -> citation -> “OurDataset, integrating omics data” object
“@type”: “Dataset”,
“name”: “OurDataset”,
“citation”: {
“@type”: “ScholarlyArticle”,
“name”: “OurDataset, integrating omics data”,
“author”: {
“@type”: “Person”,
“name”: “AA”
What Google asks us not to do is something like
“OurDataset” object -> citation -> “OurDataset” object
“@type”: “Dataset”,
“name”: “OurDataset”,
“citation”: {
“@type”: “Dataset”,
“name”: “OurDataset”
Do you agree this is what is written in that document? Should I still try to reach Dan Brickley from ?
Kind regards,

Full post:
Manage my subscriptions:
Stop emails for this post:

Dr Mingfang Wu
Australian Research Data Commons
T: +61 3 9902 4646 | E: ***@***.*** | O:0000-0003-1206-3431
Physical address: Monash University, Building T, Ground Floor, 100 Sir John Monash Drive, Caulfield East, VIC 3145

Full post:
Manage my subscriptions:
Stop emails for this post:

Full post:
Manage my subscriptions:
Stop emails for this post: