What does project metadata look like in DataCite? There are over 100,000 projects described with DataCite metadata. Current approaches in a sample of these (metadatagamechangers.com/blog/2023/5/2/…) shows no clear pattern and opportunities for improving project connectivity.
Hmm, interesting, thanks for sharing! I feel like this use case will probably be more suited to RAiD (Research Activity Identifier) once the infrastructure for that is established, especially the “Projects as Hubs” pattern you’ve identified.
Thanks for sharing @tedhabermann . However, the blogpost does not delve into the specifics of selecting relationTypes. I’m interested in understanding the best practices when it comes to selecting relationTypes in the context of project metadata. Given the diversity of projects and the need for improving project connectivity, as mentioned in the original post, it seems crucial to have clear guidelines for selecting them. I want to be able to differentiate between connections of project outputs versus connections from “buzz” on the web (citations, mentions, etc.)
Does anyone have insights or experiences to share regarding this? Any guidance would be greatly appreciated.
I agree completely on the need for community consensus on how to use various relation types (in the context of all resourceTypes) and the related questions about how to use resourceTypes. Lots of future work to do on both topics.
I have spent more time so far on the second topic. Here are a few discussions that might be interesting:
What resourceTypes are being used?
How can facets help us understand DataCite usage?
What are the “Others”?
How are data management plans being represented in DataCite?
@tedhabermann, I noticed that the FAIR Island Project was mentioned in the blog post. Are you involved in that project? If so, do you think that project could provide some guidelines on selecting relationTypes in the context of project metadata? It doesn’t seem anybody else working on this. I’d love to hear your thoughts!
Hi @raxik76460 - Ted pointed me to your note. I work with Ted and am the research data management advisor/project manager for FAIR Island. I think your suggestion of documenting guidance on relationTypes we have used in project metadata is great and we will do that. I’ll link it back here. Thanks - Erin
@raxik76460 Metadata Game Changers project metadata work is part of The FAIR Island Project and the Berkeley Island Sustainability Project. The relationTypes we used in that work were HasPart for datasets and IsDocumentedBy for other resourceTypes.
These are obviously very general relations and, IMO, keeping these general is probably a good idea. In my first Metadata Game Changers blog I discussed the differences between documentation (everything needed for reproducibility) and metadata (standard and structured part of the documentation). Documentation is generally un-structured and can be all kinds of things, and IsDocumentedBy can be used to connect to all of these things.
It is important to keep in mind that the DataCite schema includes a resourceType in relatedIdentifier that gives the type of the connected resource. Searching relatedIdentifiers for those
(more specific) types is likely to be more useful than searching more general relationTypes.