...
- Natural language search
- Ranking basic on different characteristics
- Does it support my (identifier, metadata, etc)
- Is it trusted (sustainability/certification). How long is the commitment?
- Repository "impact factor"
- Additional value adds (curatorial, linked)
- Specialized vs geneal
...
Use cases
Who are the users?
Researchers with data and they don't know where to put it, for various reasons.
| User | Situation |
|---|---|
| No community repository | The researcher is in a community without a repository |
| Doesn't fit neatly | A researcher is becoming interdisciplinary, moving to a new discpline, or has data they think might be useful for other disciplines |
| Novice/lazy | New research not aware of existing resources (note, most advice would come from social media, conferences, training) |
What are their motivations?
- Responding to request from funding agency. Might need different characteristics (needs DOI, linking etc)
- Has very large data (university can't handle it, domain repos can't handle it)
- Has specific availability requirements (5 years, 10 years)
- Is really complicated (has a lot of contextual information, does the service support it)
- Sharing – not responding to regulatory requirement – just wants to make things available for reuse
Reviewing the above publisher lists and registries, we can identify factors in the recommendation of repositories to researchers:
| Factor | Description |
|---|---|
| Funding agency approval | Funding agencies (e.g. NIH) have lists of approved repositories |
| Researcher communities | Some repositories restrict to researchers in certain communities |
| Publisher integration | Publishers (e.g., Elsevier) have arrangements with repositories (e.g., bi-directional linking) |
| Domain/Field | Repositories are often restricted by domain, with some generalist services |
| Technical restrictions | Repositories have technical restrictions (e.g., maximum file size, supported formats) |
| Community mandates | Some research communities have mandated repositories (see Nature list) |
| Data type | Some repositories are restricted to specific types of data. These criteria vary, for example:
Data types are often directly related to domain/field of study. |
| Metadata format | Some repositories are restricted to specific types of metadata (e.g., MIAME) |
| Licensing | Free and unrestricted use or public domain (PLOS) |
| Best practices | Repository adhere's to best practices pertaining to responsible data sharing, digital preservation, citation, and openness (PLOS) |
Publishers, funding agencies, and libraries construct these lists of approved repositories to meet the needs of researchers, Many of these sites now link to centralized services, such as re3data.org. However, re3data.org does not capture all of the information needed to make a recommendation (e.g., C3PR technical restrictions).
Use cases
Who are the users?
Researchers with data and they don't know where to put it, for various reasons.
...
)
...
What are their motivations?
...
.
...
Draft Questions for service providers?
...