[Rob Baxter]

Hi folks,
I seldom, if ever, have anything useful to contribute to this group, but
I follow it with great interest. Just a comment on this issue of
defining research data: in the data management plan for EUDAT2020 we’ve
written this: ‘Research data is interpreted broadly to mean “data
regarded by the EUDAT CDI’s partner organisations, supported communities
or individual researchers as being important to, or relevant for,
research.”‘ Following Andrew Treloar’s comment of earlier today, our
definition just uses more words to say the same thing as the ANDS one:
data that might be useful to researchers. Given the subjectivity
implicit in both statements, I’m not at all sure we can expect to do any
better!
Best,
Rob Baxter

Discussion