[ckan-discuss] Fwd: JISC Grant Funding 14/09: Managing Research Data Programme

[Jo Walsh]

dear all,

On 01/03/2010 14:21, Jonathan Gray wrote:
> I wonder if CKAN is a good fit for "Strand A: Citing, Linking and
> Integrating Research Data"?
>
> Does anyone have any thoughts? In particular about using CKAN for
> working with data in different domains?

I've been thinking about the geographic application of CKAN in this 
context. The benefits of annotating locations for packages in general; 
the value of adding GIS-specific metadata using plugins; the creation of 
an OpenSearch interface to do location-based queries.

Jonny and I discussed with several at the Centre for Geospatial Science 
in Nottingham the possibility of cooperating on a proposal. The CFP 
requires an English or Welsh academic institution to lead the proposal - 
perhaps EDINA isn't eligible as a lead partner - though colleagues here 
are happy with the idea of participating too.

A consortium is welcome but involves more upfront planning to ensure its 
viability as a partnership. Thus I would like to put something together 
that created shared interfaces on several repository/registry systems.

http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0ATJnv_t9ROmXZGN0Yjk3ampfMjJkemtxaGdjNQ&hl=en 
- very rough notes here, at the top a short excerpt covering the purpose 
of the call and key criteria for Strand A as defined by JISC - also 
included here:

       JISC wishes to fund projects ... to demonstrate the innovative 
potential for research and scholarly communications of improving methods 
for citing, linking and integrating research data. It is intended that 
such projects should contribute to the realisation of an integrated and 
interoperable data environment, encourage innovative techniques which 
promote the reuse of research data and demonstrate the benefits which 
may follow from such an environment.

       JISC is intending to release another call for proposals in March 
2010, focusing on 'Innovative ways to deposit and expose digital 
resources'. This will cover some of the same ground as Strand A of the 
present Call. However the differences are as follows: Strand A of the 
present Call is specifically concerned with exploring methods for 
citing, integrating and linking research data. The forthcoming ‘Deposit 
and Expose’ Call will cover research outputs, including data, and other 
types of digital content such as images, timebased media etc.

...

Some disciplines have been revolutionised by the community’s adoption of 
open data principles. The innovative and transforming potential of data 
reuse, recombinations or ‘mashups’ – for example those combining data 
with geospatial location components – is a growing source of academic 
interest and is generating palpable excitement both within and beyond 
the academy.

It is intended that such projects should contribute to the realisation 
of an integrated and interoperable data environment, encourage 
innovative techniques which promote the reuse of research data and 
demonstrate the benefits which may follow from such an environment.

Within [Strand A], projects are sought which will:

          1. facilitate publication of open access research datasets 
accompanied by appropriate ontology-based metadata and licenses.
          2. examine optimal conventions for research data citation, 
exploring and demonstrating the benefits of particular forms of citation.
          3. demonstrate approaches to, and explore the benefits of, 
integrating heterogeneous data across distributed sources.
          4. examine methods of recording provenance information, not 
only for the datasets but also for their citations and links.
          5. explore and scope specific challenges and demonstrate the 
benefits to research which may accrue from the bidirectional linking of 
research data to other research data, to publications, or to people. 
Much of the scope here is laid out in the Coles & Frey position paper 
‘The Relevance of Linking’: http://ie-repository.jisc.ac.uk/419/

Issues related to citing, integrating and linking research data that may 
be addressed include, but are not limited to:

          1. Development of annotation services that ease the task of 
metadata assignment to research datasets, thus facilitating their 
publication.
          2. Understanding the services (e.g. discovery, citation, link 
management) that are needed and those that can be expected to grow 
around linking research data.
          3. The required conventions for data citation (exploring and 
demonstrating the benefits of particular forms of citation).
          4. The challenges associated with persistent identifiers for 
data, especially those associated with versioning and granularity: i.e. 
what works for different types of research data?
          5. The role of ontologies, schemas, representation 
information, contextual and calibration metadata and/or other 
documentation in providing sufficient information for the proper re-use 
of research data.
          6. The role of the Semantic Web / ‘Linked Data’ approach, the 
use of RDF and related standards such as RDFa, SKOS, FOAF and SPARQL, to 
enhance reuse and repurposing of research data.
          7. Exploration and application of the recommendations made in 
the Cabinet Office’s Report on ‘Designing URI Sets for the UK Public 
Sector’ for scholarly research data.
          8. Integration of heterogeneous data using a cluster of 
technologies including RDF, relational to RDF mappings, SPARQL services etc.
          9. The requirement for tools to process and analyse links and 
the interaction with linked resources.
         10. Exploration of methods for assigning provenance information 
to citations and links.
         11. Protocols for automated linking, and the potential roles of 
OAI-ORE, ATOM Publishing Protocol, RSS, aggregators and syndication.
         12. The effect of database architecture, storage mechanisms 
etc. on the linking process.

1 E.g. see the Danno annotation service and associated tools being 
created by eResearch, University of Queensland, 
http://www.itee.uq.edu.au/~eresearch/projects/diasb/index.php

If the bid is from a consortium:

i) have the partners provided evidence of their commitment in the form 
of supporting letters?
ii) have the partners demonstrated how the work aligns with their 
objectives and priorities?
iii) is it clear what the role of each partner is and how the actual or 
planned management structure, governance, decision-making and funding 
arrangements will function?

cheers,


jo
--