Skip to main content


The new RDA web platform is still being rolled out. Existing RDA members PLEASE REACTIVATE YOUR ACCOUNT using this link: Please report bugs, broken links and provide your feedback using the UserSnap tool on the bottom right corner of each page. Stay updated about the web site milestones at

NEW structure and revised timeline

  • Creator
  • #104385

    Natalie Harrower

    Dear All:
    The editorial team has been working on changes to the structure of the document, which will be incorporated for the 4th release on 15th May. We have clarified the process and revised the timeline to respond to the discussion on this past Tuesday’s CoChairs & Mods call.
    The proposed new structure for each subsection is as follows (taking Clinical as an example):
    1. Data Sharing in Clinical Medicine
    3.1 Focus and Description
    3.2 Scope
    3.3 Policy Recommendations (we will explain in Sec 1. that these are for Funders, Governments etc)
    3.4 Guidelines (we will explain in Sec 1. that these are for Researchers, data stewards, etc.)
    [all references brought together at the end of the whole doc]
    The key thing to note is that we would like to put policy-level recommendations (audience: Funders, Governments, etc) in one part, and then Guidelines (concrete guidelines to researchers, data stewards, etc). in another. There is no expectation of a balance between the two parts – this will vary of course by subWG. In restructuring, the plan is to bring more coherence to the document, make it easier to navigate, but leave maximum flexibility for each group to communicate what is particular to their area in the best way possible.
    The editorial team will take the contents of today’s release (3) and rework them into the new structure, and circulate that on Tuesday 12th May. We can discuss it and the timeline on Tuesday’s call. Then the subgroups will have the opportunity to work on this structure for the rest of the week, adding new content if desired for the 4th release on 15 May. So between now and Tuesday, it might be helpful to keep this Recommendation vs Guideline split in mind. The intention is to keep the document as concise as possible, so the contents of longer documents that some groups are working on will be addressed separately (discuss Tuesday).
    We also need to discuss and make final decisions on authorship/attribution, and reference style and doubtless a couple of other things.
    The revised timeline for the upcoming weeks is as follows:
    12 May 10:00am UTC
    Newly structured document is circulated to subWGs, based on 3rd release text.
    14 May
    Ed team work to refine the text in what is now called ‘Foundational Recommendations’
    14 May 10pm UTC
    Deadline for subWGs to finish sections for 4th release using new document format
    15 May
    Editorial team finalises, and publishes 4th Release
    16-21 May
    Groups work on final draft (5th release); Ed team again refines Sec 2 & other changes needed
    21 May 10pm UTC
    Deadline for subWGs to finish sections for Final/5th release
    Th 21 May – Tu 26
    Editorial team works on the Final/5th release
    Th 28 May
    Final draft (5th) released for comment
    28 May – 8 June
    Community comment and feedback (10 days)
    Please send any feedback/questions on the above that you may have, today if possible!
    Thanks all,
    Read our statement on ‘Playing Our Part during COVID-19’
    Dr. Natalie Harrower
    Director, Digital Repository of Ireland
    Royal Irish Academy
    ***@***.*** | @natalieharrower | @dri_ireland
    European Commission FAIR data expert group
    European Open Science Cloud (EOSC) FAIR working group
    The Academy is subject to the FOI Act 2014, the Data Protection Acts 1988-2003 and 2018, GDPR (EU 2016/679) and S.I. No. 336/2011, EC Privacy & Electronic Communications Regulations. For further information see our website

  • Author
  • #129878

    Thank you Natalie,
    Can you also please clarify the structure (and source of content) for the cross-cutting topics such as standards, repositories and software? Will this larger group be able to see a draft?
    Kind regards
    (Sent from my phone)

    Prof. Susanna-Assunta Sansone, PhD
    Associate Director, Oxford e-Research Centre
    Associate Professor, Dep of Engineering Science
    University of Oxford, UK
    ORCiD: 0000-0001-5306-5690

  • #129877

    Dear Natalie,
    Thanks for this; I have some interrogations
    1) on the difference we make between “focus” and “scope”; I find it
    ambiguous ; I would think description is the lanscape (not very focused,
    overview of the issues) and scope is among the above, what we cover,
    what we focus on. Then I do not understand why focus is separated from
    scope in a different chapter. Can you clarify?
    2) are the cross-cutting sub-groups operating according to the same
    3) where do we put the ref to resources like great data sources that do
    not fall under a specific recommendations. Will th be later on in
    decision tree?

Log in to reply.