[open-science] “We are entering an era of open science” says EU Vice President Neelie Kroes at launch of new global Research Data Alliance

Fri Mar 22 21:14:18 UTC 2013

Exactly Matt. There are indeed legitimate exceptions (like privacy). But it
would be wonderful to see a stronger, more explicit 'open by default'
approach from the RDA (as per the Panton Principles. Would you or others be
in a position to propose this - either as a new WG, or as an additional
focus area for an existing one?

On 22 March 2013 12:12, Matt Jones <jones at nceas.ucsb.edu> wrote:

> Hi Jonathan --
>
> Those are great points, and I agree that an open data working group would
> be a fantastic addition to RDA, for exactly the reasons that you raise.  Of
> course, as was evident on this list a few weeks ago, there are some
> legitimate reasons why some research data are not open, such as human
> subjects data with the privacy of personal information is at stake (e.g.,
> medical records).  I think it would be great if the RDA were strongly
> supporting open data while clarifying which types of data might qualify for
> exceptions -- global agreement on these classifications would allow major
> gains by clarifying that we expect the vast majority of data to be open
> data.
>
> Matt
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 10:38 AM, Jonathan Gray <jonathan.gray at okfn.org>wrote:
>
>> Hi Matt,
>>
>> This is great to know. While the emphasis on open data may be implicit
>> and evident to partners, it is not so evident on the current website! So
>> happy to hear that there is broad support. :-)
>>
>> To be a bit more specific, it is not clear that the 'sharing' and 'reuse'
>> that are described on the RDA website extend to the public, as opposed to
>> sharing between institutions or researchers. Also it is not clear that
>> there is a principled commitment to openness (as in the OpenDefinition.org)
>> and removing restrictions on reuse (as per the Panton Principles), as
>> opposed to - for example - the more typical terms and conditions for
>> research data distribution services which often permit private use, but
>> which may limit redistribution and further downstream sharing.
>>
>> Typically the reuse rights for aggregators are only as permissive as
>> upstream providers (researchers, institutions, etc) allow, so while there
>> may be a commitment to open data from the RDA, this would have to be
>> accompanied by serious commitments from funders, research bodies, national
>> agencies, etc. Given that the rights clearance, evangelism, standards
>> building and best practises work involved in explicitly opening up the
>> world's research data is a non-trivial, I'd expect open data to be a core
>> focus of at least one of the working groups. Perhaps it already is?
>>
>> In any case - great to hear that there is core support for open data, and
>> I look forward to hearing more about RDA plans on this front.
>>
>> All the best,
>>
>> Jonathan
>>
>>
>> On 22 March 2013 11:13, Matt Jones <jones at nceas.ucsb.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> Jonathan --
>>>
>>> At DataONE, we've been involved in the talks leading to the formation of
>>> the Research Data Alliance, as have many of the other DataNet partners in
>>> the US.  DataONE and these other partners all have a commitment to open
>>> data, and I fully expect that it would be a major emphasis of RDA. I think
>>> it is implicit in almost all of the activities I have seen to date.
>>>  Certainly most of the the working group activities have moved beyond
>>> simply stating that data should be open, and instead focus on how one gets
>>> there via metadata interoperability, long-term preservation, etc. (see
>>> http://rd-alliance.org/working-groups/current-candidate-groups/). Are
>>> you thinking there is some explicit risk that RDA will try to be non-open,
>>> or are you just trying to raise the profile of open data within the RDA
>>> activities? Thanks for the clarification...
>>>
>>> Matt
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 8:58 AM, Jonathan Gray <jonathan.gray at okfn.org>wrote:
>>>
>>>> FYI
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://blog.okfn.org/2013/03/21/we-are-entering-an-era-of-open-science-says-eu-vp-neelie-kroes/
>>>>
>>>> Is anyone in touch with or involved with the Research Data Alliance? It
>>>> would be wonderful if there could be an open data working group, and a
>>>> stronger focus on open data (and the Panton Principles) more generally!
>>>>
>>>> http://rd-alliance.org/
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Jonathan Gray <http://jonathangray.org/> | @jwyg<http://twitter.com/jwyg>
>>>> Director of Policy and Ideas
>>>> The Open Knowledge Foundation <http://okfn.org/> | @okfn<http://twitter.com/okfn>
>>>> Support our work: okfn.org/support
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> open-science mailing list
>>>> open-science at lists.okfn.org
>>>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
>>>> Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-science
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jonathan Gray <http://jonathangray.org/> | @jwyg<http://twitter.com/jwyg>
>> Director of Policy and Ideas
>> The Open Knowledge Foundation <http://okfn.org/> | @okfn<http://twitter.com/okfn>
>> Support our work: okfn.org/support
>>
>
>

-- 
Jonathan Gray <http://jonathangray.org/> | @jwyg <http://twitter.com/jwyg>
Director of Policy and Ideas
The Open Knowledge Foundation <http://okfn.org/> |
@okfn<http://twitter.com/okfn>
Support our work: okfn.org/support
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-science/attachments/20130322/747189da/attachment-0001.html>