FAIR Principles: Interpretations and Implementation Considerations. Jacobsen, A., de Miranda Azevedo, R., Juty, N., Batista, D., Coles, S., Cornet, R., Courtot, M., Crosas, M., Dumontier, M., Evelo, C., T., Goble, C., Guizzardi, G., Hansen, K., K., Hasnain, A., Hettne, K., Heringa, J., Hooft, R., W., Imming, M., Jeffery, K., G., Kaliyaperumal, R., Kersloot, M., G., Kirkpatrick, C., R., Kuhn, T., Labastida, I., Magagna, B., McQuilton, P., Meyers, N., Montesanti, A., van Reisen, M., Rocca-Serra, P., Pergl, R., Sansone, S., da Silva Santos, L., O., B., Schneider, J., Strawn, G., Thompson, M., Waagmeester, A., Weigel, T., Wilkinson, M., D., Willighagen, E., L., Wittenburg, P., Roos, M., Mons, B., & Schultes, E. Data Intelligence, 2(1-2):10-29, 1, 2020.
FAIR Principles: Interpretations and Implementation Considerations [link]Website  abstract   bibtex   
The FAIR principles have been widely cited, endorsed and adopted by a broad range of stakeholders since their publication in 2016. By intention, the 15 FAIR guiding principles do not dictate specific technological implementations, but provide guidance for improving Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability and Reusability of digital resources. This has likely contributed to the broad adoption of the FAIR principles, because individual stakeholder communities can implement their own FAIR solutions. However, it has also resulted in inconsistent interpretations that carry the risk of leading to incompatible implementations. Thus, while the FAIR principles are formulated on a high level and may be interpreted and implemented in different ways, for true interoperability we need to support convergence in implementation choices that are widely accessible and (re)-usable. We introduce the concept of FAIR implementation considerations to assist accelerated global participation and convergence towards accessible, robust, widespread and consistent FAIR implementations. Any self-identified stakeholder community may either choose to reuse solutions from existing implementations, or when they spot a gap, accept the challenge to create the needed solution, which, ideally, can be used again by other communities in the future. Here, we provide interpretations and implementation considerations (choices and challenges) for each FAIR principle.
@article{
 title = {FAIR Principles: Interpretations and Implementation Considerations},
 type = {article},
 year = {2020},
 identifiers = {[object Object]},
 pages = {10-29},
 volume = {2},
 websites = {https://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/dint_r_00024},
 month = {1},
 id = {bfeb8cec-d455-3ef0-acf5-1b2e0ad24181},
 created = {2020-07-20T08:38:47.818Z},
 file_attached = {false},
 profile_id = {17c87d5d-2470-32d7-b273-0734a1d9195f},
 last_modified = {2020-12-01T10:10:42.667Z},
 read = {false},
 starred = {false},
 authored = {true},
 confirmed = {true},
 hidden = {false},
 citation_key = {Jacobsen2020},
 private_publication = {false},
 abstract = {The FAIR principles have been widely cited, endorsed and adopted by a broad range of stakeholders since their publication in 2016. By intention, the 15 FAIR guiding principles do not dictate specific technological implementations, but provide guidance for improving Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability and Reusability of digital resources. This has likely contributed to the broad adoption of the FAIR principles, because individual stakeholder communities can implement their own FAIR solutions. However, it has also resulted in inconsistent interpretations that carry the risk of leading to incompatible implementations. Thus, while the FAIR principles are formulated on a high level and may be interpreted and implemented in different ways, for true interoperability we need to support convergence in implementation choices that are widely accessible and (re)-usable. We introduce the concept of FAIR implementation considerations to assist accelerated global participation and convergence towards accessible, robust, widespread and consistent FAIR implementations. Any self-identified stakeholder community may either choose to reuse solutions from existing implementations, or when they spot a gap, accept the challenge to create the needed solution, which, ideally, can be used again by other communities in the future. Here, we provide interpretations and implementation considerations (choices and challenges) for each FAIR principle.},
 bibtype = {article},
 author = {Jacobsen, Annika and de Miranda Azevedo, Ricardo and Juty, Nick and Batista, Dominique and Coles, Simon and Cornet, Ronald and Courtot, Mélanie and Crosas, Mercè and Dumontier, Michel and Evelo, Chris T. and Goble, Carole and Guizzardi, Giancarlo and Hansen, Karsten Kryger and Hasnain, Ali and Hettne, Kristina and Heringa, Jaap and Hooft, Rob W.W. and Imming, Melanie and Jeffery, Keith G. and Kaliyaperumal, Rajaram and Kersloot, Martijn G. and Kirkpatrick, Christine R. and Kuhn, Tobias and Labastida, Ignasi and Magagna, Barbara and McQuilton, Peter and Meyers, Natalie and Montesanti, Annalisa and van Reisen, Mirjam and Rocca-Serra, Philippe and Pergl, Robert and Sansone, Susanna-Assunta and da Silva Santos, Luiz Olavo Bonino and Schneider, Juliane and Strawn, George and Thompson, Mark and Waagmeester, Andra and Weigel, Tobias and Wilkinson, Mark D. and Willighagen, Egon L. and Wittenburg, Peter and Roos, Marco and Mons, Barend and Schultes, Erik},
 journal = {Data Intelligence},
 number = {1-2}
}

Downloads: 0