In my last blog post, I looked at the four quadrants of research data curation systems<\/a>.\u00a0 This categorised systems that manage or describe research data assets by whether their primary role is to store metadata or data, and whether the information is for private or public use.\u00a0 Four systems were then put into these quadrants.<\/p>\n The University of Edinburgh already has two active services from this diagram: PURE<\/a>, our Current Research Information System and DataShare<\/a>, our open data repository.<\/p>\n This blog post will start to unpack some of the requirements for a Data Asset Register.<\/p>\n The first aspect to cover is its name.\u00a0 What should it be called?\u00a0 Traditionally systems like this, which only hold metadata records that either just describe, or describe and point to other resources, are known as registers, catalogues, directories, indexes, or inventories.<\/p>\n The University already has a \u2018Data Catalogue<\/a>\u2019, maintained by the Data Library.\u00a0 However this list has a different purpose, to hold details of external data.\u00a0 Oxford University, instead of opting for a name such as this, have instead opted to call their service by the verb \u2018find\u2019 \u2013 DataFinder<\/a>.\u00a0 Whilst there may be some brand or service name applied to the system we create at the University of Edinburgh, for now its working title is \u2018Data Asset Register\u2019 as one of its main functions will be to allow data creators to \u2018register\u2019 their data assets by describing them, and if the data is published online to link to the data.<\/p>\n But what should the Data Asset Register provide?\u00a0 The following diagram shows some early thoughts:<\/p>\n The diagram splits this up into three broad areas:<\/p>\n The core purpose of the system is to describe data.\u00a0 This is split into two categories: being able to describe single items or data assets, and describing collections of data assets.\u00a0 Many data assets are created on their own, for example a population health longitudinal study.\u00a0 As such, this should be described on its own.\u00a0 In contrast, some data are created in large sets, where it isn\u2019t necessarily useful to describe every part of that set on its own.\u00a0 In this case, the collection as a whole can be described. A good example of this is the Research Data Australia<\/a> service from the Australian National Data Service<\/a>.<\/p>\n We\u2019ll need to decide how to describe the data.\u00a0 A likely initial candidate will be the DataCite Metadata Schema<\/a>, but we may find this needs to be extended to cover extra elements relevant to the University or the discipline of the data asset being described.\u00a0 There will also be requirements coming from a possible UK research data registry<\/a>, development of which is being led by the Digital Curation Centre<\/a>.<\/p>\n In order to enable data asset description, a register will need certain functions.\u00a0 So far three have been identified:<\/p>\n \u201cResearch organisations will ensure that EPSRC-funded research data is securely preserved for a minimum of 10-years from the date that any researcher \u2018privileged access\u2019 period expires or, if others have accessed the data, from last date on which access to the data was requested by a third party;\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n It may also be that the Data Asset Register can be a front-end for our Data Vault too \u2013 more about that in another blog post<\/a>!<\/p>\n Extra value-added services are required in order to make the Data Asset Register useful to people.\u00a0 Our initial thoughts about these services include the following:<\/p>\n It is very early days in our thinking about what features a Data Asset Register should offer, and like many components of a modern research data management infrastructure, there are very few existing examples to look at.\u00a0 Our thoughts will be refined over the coming months so that we can start looking at implementation options. \u00a0Is there an existing system that can do all of this for us, or is it better to build something new, either alone or with collaborators?<\/p>\n Images available from\u00a0http:\/\/dx.doi.org\/10.6084\/m9.figshare.873617<\/a><\/p>\n Stuart Lewis, Head of Research and Learning Services, Library & University Collections.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" [Reposted from\u00a0https:\/\/libraryblogs.is.ed.ac.uk\/blog\/2013\/12\/12\/thinking-about-research-data-asset-registers\/] In my last blog post, I looked at the four quadrants of research data curation systems.\u00a0 This categorised systems that manage or describe research data assets by whether their primary role is to store metadata or data, and … Continue reading ![\"quadrants3\"](\"https:\/\/libraryblogs.is.ed.ac.uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/12\/quadrants3.png\")
<\/p>\n![\"dar-thoughts\"](\"https:\/\/libraryblogs.is.ed.ac.uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/12\/dar-thoughts.png\")
<\/p>\n\n
Description<\/h2>\n
Functions<\/h2>\n
\n
Services<\/h2>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n