This paged is used to discuss recommendations in the field of Discovery/Finding which in our interpretation is related to metadata creation, maintenance and usage. We distinguish 4 statements:
- Suggestions which come from RDA WG outputs (RDA WG)
- Suggestions which emerge from RDA discussions (RDA)
- Suggestions from other initiatives such as FAIR etc.
- Suggestions for RDA Recommendations (RDA REC) which will be the result of RDA interactions
If there are more statements that relate to this bundle we should add them.
MD1. RDA DFT-1.1: A digital object (DO) ... has properties that are described by metadata.
MD2. RDA DFT-1.2: A persistent identifier is ... persistently resolved to meaningful state information (systems metadata) about the identified DO.
MD3. RDA DFT-1.5: Metadata contains descriptive, contextual and provenance assertions about the properties of a DO. Note: To make metadata referable it needs to be associated with a PID and thus is a DO. Note: Metadata minimally needs to contain the PID of the DO.
MD4. RDA DFT-1.7: A Digital Collection is identified by a PID and described by metadata.
MD5. RDA DFT-1.13: A digital metadata repository is a digital repository that is able to store, manage and curate metadata.
MD6. FAIR-F1: metadata are assigned a globally unique and eternally persistent identifier.
MD7. FAIR-F2: data are described with rich metadata.
MD8. FAIR-F3: metadata are registered or indexed in a searchable resource.
MD9. FAIR-F4: metadata specify the data identifier
MD10. FAIR-A1: metadata are retrievable by their identifier ...
MD11. FAIR-A2: metadata are accessible
MD12. FAIR-I1: metadata use a formal, accessible, shared, and broadly applicable language for knowledge representation.
MD13. FAIR-I2: metadata use vocabularies that follow FAIR principles.
MD14. FAIR-I3: metadata include qualified references to other (meta) data.
MD15. FAIR-R1: metadata have a plurality of accurate and relevant attributes.
MD16. FAIR-R1.1: metadata are released with a clear and accessible data usage language.
MD17. FAIR-R1.2: metadata are associated with their provenance.
MD18. FAIR-R1.3: metadata meet domain relevant community standards.
MD19. RDA: Metadata needs to be openly accessible and harvestable via common protocols such as OAI-PMH or ResourceSynch.
MD20. RDA: Metadata schema must be registered in an open schema registry.
MD21. RDA: Concepts used in metadata need to be registered and define in open concept registries using an accepted formal semantic language.
MD22. RDA: Metadata needs to be created as early as possible, at least at the time of registration at a repository a metada description needs to be available.
MD23. RDA: Metadata will be harvested, used and changed/extended by users dependent on the needs requiring an information in the PID where the original metadata can be found.
MD24. RDA: Metadata structure and semantics need to be in a form that service providers can turn the decsriptions into semantic assertions in RDF format.
MD25. RDA-DFT: Metadata is associated with collections which can exist of a number of digital entities, i.e. the level of granularity at which metadata will be assigned is left to the communities and repositories. A high granularity is recommended to anticipate future applications.
From these statements we can draw a number of obviously widely agreed recommendations:
REC1: (to come as a process of finding convergence in an open discussion)