FAIR Principles – Connecting the Dots for the IDCC 2017
In order to follow through our presentation at the IDCC17 in Edinburgh on the 22nd February 2017 we are providing some useful documents and links here.
Here you can find the pre-print and not peer reviewed version of the practice paper with the title ‘Are the FAIR Data Principles fair?’.
The corresponding Excel Spreadsheet with the evaluation overview of 37 data repositories, statistical analysis and graphical figures is available in our data archive under the name ‘Evaluation of data repositories based on the FAIR Principles for IDCC 2017 practice paper’.
Our very first approach on reviewing a data repository and using the FAIR principles as scoring matrix resulted in the following overview about the 4TU.Centre for Research Data called ‘FAIR Principles – review in Context of 4TU.ResearchData’.
The review in context of 4TU.Research Data helps to understand how we approached this quantitative evaluation of these repositories. Additionally we blogged about our interpretation of the FAIR principles and facets, to display the exact features the repositories have been measured against.
The initial spark for this research project was lit by the European Commission and their updated demands on data management for the Horizon 2020 projects. There are two versions of the FAIR Principles available online: a short list of the principles and appropriate facets, and the extended and guided version. The Nature article by the contributors and authors of the FAIR principles recaps the rationale behind the principles and the experiences of implementing them.
‘Guidelines on FAIR Data Management in Horizon 2020‘ by the European Commission.
The short version of the ‘FAIR DATA PRINCIPLES’.
The extended version of the ‘FAIR DATA PRINCIPLES’.
Read the Nature article ‘The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship‘.
Open Working 
Awesome content, thanks.
Some nitpicking advice:
-“Follow the link” is almost as ‘suboptimal’ as “Click Here”. Why and what to do instead is explained at https://www.w3.org/QA/Tips/noClickHere
– on webpages users expect underlined text to be a link
LikeLike
Thanks Rud for the input, I was thinking about several ways to write and decided me for the obviously worst one (as I know now). I will adjust the links accordingly.
LikeLike