Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

FAIR Metadata #724

Open
EliVolsch opened this issue Oct 3, 2024 · 7 comments
Open

FAIR Metadata #724

EliVolsch opened this issue Oct 3, 2024 · 7 comments
Assignees
Labels
Priority: Medium Support Portal Ticket logged via Kartoza support portal

Comments

@EliVolsch
Copy link
Collaborator

Priory: Medium

Dear colleagues, we would like our resources to comply with the FAIR principles. However, my colleague Claudia ran some automatic checks to assess our compliance with FAIR and we appear to fail under several principles. What is you experience with FAIR and Geonode? Could you please assist us and indicate which metadata fields we need to fill in in order to be FAIR-compliant?

@EliVolsch EliVolsch added Support Portal Ticket logged via Kartoza support portal Priority: Medium labels Oct 3, 2024
@SterckxArnaud
Copy link
Collaborator

Here are the results of the checks:
image

@SterckxArnaud
Copy link
Collaborator

@meomancer
Copy link
Collaborator

I checked on geonode demo, they have also same FAIR values
So should we update it by us or waiting geonode?

https://fair-enough.semanticscience.org/evaluations/6d32521f581cd82f2ca00c128f6a100408f5c043

cc @EliVolsch @SterckxArnaud @clau1313

@SterckxArnaud
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi Irwan, I am surprised by the relatively poor score of GeoNode. Do you know if it is a priority on Geonode's developers' side to improve it? Maybe @timlinux could advise us on this?

@meomancer
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi @SterckxArnaud Maybe we didn't test it correctly, as @gubuntu said that GeoNode metadata is already FAIR compliant.
I think we need to research how above test is run

@clau1313
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi @meomancer, thank you. In addition, I checked directly the GGMN site (instead of the DOI) and it scored quite low (3/22): https://fair-enough.semanticscience.org/evaluations/98710a320f49d1e339a4a75ab252815c173973fa

With this other tool the GGMN site doesn't score very high either: https://www.f-uji.net/index.php

Although we are unsure of what is the best test to use, we think that the FAIRness of GGMN can be improved.

Could you please look into how we might improve the FAIRness of GGMN (either using the tests above or any others you find more suitable)? Could you also provide a quote outlining what would be required to implement these improvements? Thanks!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Priority: Medium Support Portal Ticket logged via Kartoza support portal
Projects
Status: Blocked or More Information
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants