Skip to main content

Notice

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: https://rda-login.wicketcloud.com/users/confirmation. 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: https://www.rd-alliance.org/rda-web-platform-upcoming-features-and-functionalities/

#130529

RDA Admin
Administrator

Andrea,
Excellent point. As the editorial team was analysing the contribution to the
Google doc, we did note that this principle I2 involves recursion, as it
implies that all FAIR principles need to be tested against the used
vocabularies.
The GO-FAIR clarification seems to limit it to Findable and Accessible:
“The controlled vocabulary used to describe datasets needs to be documented
and resolvable using globally unique and persistent identifiers. This
documentation needs to be easily findable and accessible by anyone who uses
the dataset.”
Although it could be argued that Interoperable and (especially) Reusable are
often also important aspects of the use of vocabularies.
Makx.
From: andrea.perego=***@***.***-groups.org
On Behalf Of andrea.perego
Sent: 12 June 2019 09:28
To: ***@***.***; ***@***.***-groups.org
Subject: Re: [fair_maturity] Reminder for online meeting, 18 June 2019
Dear Edit, dear Keith,
If I may, I would like to raise a point in relation to slide 23, concerning
I.2 – “(meta)data use vocabularies that follow FAIR principles”.
The issue here is that it is not explicit which of the FAIR principles
should be tested, and how, to determine if (and how much) a (meta)data
vocabulary complies with FAIR principles.
I wonder whether providing clear guidelines on this topic is in scope with
the WG.
I think it would be very much helpful for (meta)data providers to be able to
verify if the vocabularies they use are or not FAIR-compliant. In case they
are still deciding which vocabulary to use, FAIR-compliance could be one of
the criteria to be taken into account. Moreover, I see benefits also on the
side of standard bodies and/or communities managing vocabularies: in such a
case, FAIR principles can be taken into account when designing or revising a
vocabulary.
Thanks
Andrea