Skip to main content

Notice

The new RDA web platform is still being rolled out. Existing RDA members PLEASE REACTIVATE YOUR ACCOUNT using this link: https://rda-login.wicketcloud.com/users/confirmation. Please report bugs, broken links and provide your feedback using the UserSnap tool on the bottom right corner of each page. Stay updated about the web site milestones at https://www.rd-alliance.org/rda-web-platform-upcoming-features-and-functionalities/.

RE: [rda-legalinterop-ig] RE: [rda-legalinterop-ig] Final revisions to Implementation…

  • Creator
    Discussion
  • #122695

    Donat Agosti
    Member

    If they have the same to offer … It just shows my bias and ignorance….
    Donat
    From: jbminster=***@***.***-groups.org [mailto:***@***.***-groups.org] On Behalf Of jbminster
    Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2016 5:20 PM
    To: Donat Agosti ; RDA/CODATA Legal Interoperability IG
    Cc: Jean-Bernard Minster ; Repositorian
    Subject: Re: [rda-legalinterop-ig] RE: [rda-legalinterop-ig] Final revisions to Implementation…
    Hi Donat: This is a joint RDA/CODATA IG. I think CODATA might be unhappy if we ignored their Data Science Journal. Bernard
    On Apr 7, 2016, at 08:14, agosti wrote:
    Dear Gail and Paul
    An option would be to submit the article to the new RIO journal which then would allow to include reviewers, public comments if desired etc. It would publish our recommendation and guidelines properly, we’ll have a DOI to cite it and work with one of the most advanced publishers in the area of OA publishing.
    Here is the Web site (http://rio.pensoft.net) and here the EU BON data sharing policy we just published http://rio.pensoft.net/articles.php?id=8458 .
    I am involved in the semantic backbone, the oa policy of the journal.
    Cheers
    Donat
    – Show quoted text -From: gperetsm=***@***.***-groups.org [mailto:***@***.***-groups.org] On Behalf Of Repositorian
    Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2016 4:46 PM
    To: Peretsman-Clement, Gail ; RDA/CODATA Legal Interoperability IG
    Subject: Re: [rda-legalinterop-ig] Final revisions to Implementation Guidelines prior to second…
    Colleagues,
    Please forgive the unintended spamming- I am very sorry! The RDA website stalled out during my posting so I apparently hit the save button a few too many times.
    Drinks on me in Denver, ok?
    😉 Gail
    From: gperetsm=***@***.***-groups.org [mailto:***@***.***-groups.org] On Behalf Of Repositorian
    Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2016 7:36 AM
    To: RDA/CODATA Legal Interoperability IG
    Subject: Re: [rda-legalinterop-ig] Final revisions to Implementation Guidelines prior to second review
    Thanks Paul!
    A question for our group: what preferences are there for sharing the final document for reviewers at the Force2016 conference next week? My poster on teaching objectives based on this group’s work was accepted, and the conference is asking presenters to submit their contributions to an open access conference site via FigShare. The submission includes the group by formal name as a Contributor to the session. (Thi s was based on a prior discussion on this list about a possible prez at Force2016)
    Any concerns if the final document that goes out to reviewers is included in the Force2016 conference site? It would be clearly labelled as the draft for review as of xx date.
    Thanks for considering!
    Gail
    Gail P. Clement | Head of Research Services | Caltech Library | Mail Code 1-43 | Pasadena CA 91125-4300 | 626-395-1203 http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5494-4806 | library.caltech.edu

    Full post: https://rd-alliance.org/group/rdacodata-legal-interoperability-ig/post/f
    Manage my subscriptions: https://rd-alliance.org/mailinglist
    Stop emails for this post: https://rd-alliance.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/51905

    Full post: https://rd-alliance.org/group/rdacodata-legal-interoperability-ig/post/r
    Manage my subscriptions: https://rd-alliance.org/mailinglist
    Stop emails for this post: https://rd-alliance.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/51909
    If they have the same to offer … It just shows my bias and ignorance….
    Donat
    From: jbminster=***@***.***-groups.org [mailto:***@***.***-groups.org] On Behalf Of jbminster
    Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2016 5:20 PM
    To: Donat Agosti ; RDA/CODATA Legal Interoperability IG
    Cc: Jean-Bernard Minster ; Repositorian
    Subject: Re: [rda-legalinterop-ig] RE: [rda-legalinterop-ig] Final revisions to Implementation…
    Hi Donat: This is a joint RDA/CODATA IG. I think CODATA might be unhappy if we ignored their Data Science Journal. Bernard
    On Apr 7, 2016, at 08:14, agosti wrote:
    Dear Gail and Paul
    An option would be to submit the article to the new RIO journal which then would allow to include reviewers, public comments if desired etc. It would publish our recommendation and guidelines properly, we’ll have a DOI to cite it and work with one of the most advanced publishers in the area of OA publishing.
    Here is the Web site (http://rio.pensoft.net) and here the EU BON data sharing policy we just published http://rio.pensoft.net/articles.php?id=8458 .
    I am involved in the semantic backbone, the oa policy of the journal.
    Cheers
    Donat
    From: gperetsm=***@***.***-groups.org [mailto:***@***.***-groups.org] On Behalf Of Repositorian
    Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2016 4:46 PM
    To: Peretsman-Clement, Gail ; RDA/CODATA Legal Interoperability IG
    Subject: Re: [rda-legalinterop-ig] Final revisions to Implementation Guidelines prior to second…
    Colleagues,
    Please forgive the unintended spamming- I am very sorry! The RDA website stalled out during my posting so I apparently hit the save button a few too many times.
    Drinks on me in Denver, ok?
    😉 Gail
    – Show quoted text -From: gperetsm=***@***.***-groups.org [mailto:***@***.***-groups.org] On Behalf Of Repositorian
    Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2016 7:36 AM
    To: RDA/CODATA Legal Interoperability IG
    Subject: Re: [rda-legalinterop-ig] Final revisions to Implementation Guidelines prior to second review
    Thanks Paul!
    A question for our group: what preferences are there for sharing the final document for reviewers at the Force2016 conference next week? My poster on teaching objectives based on this group’s work was accepted, and the conference is asking presenters to submit their contributions to an open access conference site via FigShare. The submission includes the group by formal name as a Contributor to the session. (Thi s was based on a prior discussion on this list about a possible prez at Force2016)
    Any concerns if the final document that goes out to reviewers is included in the Force2016 conference site? It would be clearly labelled as the draft for review as of xx date.
    Thanks for considering!
    Gail
    Gail P. Clement | Head of Research Services | Caltech Library | Mail Code 1-43 | Pasadena CA 91125-4300 | 626-395-1203 http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5494-4806 | library.caltech.edu

    Full post: https://rd-alliance.org/group/rdacodata-legal-interoperability-ig/post/f
    Manage my subscriptions: https://rd-alliance.org/mailinglist
    Stop emails for this post: https://rd-alliance.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/51905

    Full post: https://rd-alliance.org/group/rdacodata-legal-interoperability-ig/post/r
    Manage my subscriptions: https://rd-alliance.org/mailinglist
    Stop emails for this post: https://rd-alliance.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/51909

Log in to reply.