Group Mailing list Archive

27 May 2019

Reminder for contributions to the collaborative document

Dear members of the RDA FAIR Data Maturity Model Working Group,
As we are getting nearer to the next online meeting on 18 June 2019, we’d
like to remind the members of the group that contributions to the
collaborative document at [1] are open until the 31st of May 2019.
Following requests from the community, we have now added a section in the
document under the heading “Choices Beyond FAIR” [2] where you can propose
indicators and maturity levels for aspects that are not explicitly included

27 May 2019

Analysis of existing assessment tools as an RDA supporting output

Hi members of the RDA FAIR maturity working group,
We have now published the results of an Analysis of Existing FAIR
Assessment Tools on the RDA website as a supporting output of the working
group. This will be open for comment more broadly also beyond the working
The work can be referenced, we are just finalising the citation.

23 May 2019

Extensive list of FAIRness evaluation criteria from SHARC- Re: [fair_maturity]

Dear colleague,
Many thanks for your fantastic work! Following your invitation to
contribute, we would like to share the extensive list of Fairness
criteria we have identified so far as part of the RDA-SHARC's work. But
we are a bit confused on how to do that on your document here
*So find our list of criteria there:*

08 May 2019

Message to FAIR WG

Dear members of the RDA FAIR Data Maturity Model Working Group! We would like to make you aware that we have published a revised version of the report of the meeting of the WG in Philadelphia, with several people added to the attendance list. You can find the revised report at [1]. As you all know, we are currently soliciting contributions from the Working Group in the collaborative worksheet at [2]. We are happy to report that there are now 44 indicators with proposed maturity levels in the worksheet.

22 Apr 2019

Re: [fair_maturity] Workshop #2 Report

thank you very much for sharing your thoughts! I very much agree with most of your points, especially those regarding the need to set up and sustainably operate the necessary infrastructures for curation and storage, both for data and the associated metadata.
However, there are two areas where my views might be somewhat differing from what you outlined:

19 Apr 2019

Google spreadsheet for your contributions

Dear members of the RDA FAIR Data Maturity Model Working Group,
As announced earlier this week, we have created a Google spreadsheet [1] to
support the further work of the Working Group in developing the core
assessment criteria. This spreadsheet includes four worksheets:
1. Introduction, with an overview of context, objective and approach
2. Landscaping exercise, with the results of the initial analysis of
existing approaches
3. Development, with sections for each of the principles where you can enter

19 Apr 2019

Re: [fair_maturity] Workshop #2 Report

Hello to all
Is it important to include access rights and conditions in the evaluation of FAIRness?
Yes and should be linked to the extend to which machine readable metadata exist for access/use and not their openess. As the paper righly highlights"FAIR is not equal to open".
Under which area (F, A, I, R, beyond FAIR) or principle should it be evaluated?
Vassilios Peristeras
European Commission and International Hellenic University
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
-------- Original message --------