HMC Community Wiki

User Tools

Site Tools

Trace:
wiki:m4.0

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision		Previous revision
wiki:m4.0 [2025/05/20 13:47] – [2. Possible alternative solutions] esoedingwiki:m4.0 [2025/05/20 14:42] (current) – [5. Naming of communities that have already implemented the recommendation] esoeding
Line 34: Line 34:
  
 ^                         ^ mandatory  ^ conditional           ^ optional ^ ^                         ^ mandatory  ^ conditional           ^ optional ^
-^ Helmholtz FAIR Principle|            |      |          |+^ Helmholtz FAIR Principle|            |  X    |          |
  
 =====Precondition for Implementation: ===== =====Precondition for Implementation: =====
  
 +The institution needs to be a member of Data Cite or needs to partner with a member to be able to register IGSNs. 
 =====Related Recommendations ===== =====Related Recommendations =====
  
-Parent: 
  
-Dependent:+Parent: 0.1 
 + 
 +Dependent: 4.1, 4.2, 4.3 
  
 Other: none Other: none
Line 82: Line 84:
  
 What: Lab- or institution-specific sample IDs. What: Lab- or institution-specific sample IDs.
 +
 Pros: Easy to implement, tailored to local needs. Pros: Easy to implement, tailored to local needs.
 +
 Cons: Not globally unique, not resolvable, hard to track across systems or publications. Cons: Not globally unique, not resolvable, hard to track across systems or publications.
  
   * Accession Numbers in Domain Repositories   * Accession Numbers in Domain Repositories
 What: Identifiers assigned by domain-specific repositories or museums (e.g., GenBank accession numbers, museum catalog numbers). What: Identifiers assigned by domain-specific repositories or museums (e.g., GenBank accession numbers, museum catalog numbers).
 +
 Pros: Well-integrated in their domains. Pros: Well-integrated in their domains.
 +
 Cons: Often not globally unique, not persistent outside their system, not interoperable across disciplines. Cons: Often not globally unique, not persistent outside their system, not interoperable across disciplines.
  
   * Handle System / Custom DOIs   * Handle System / Custom DOIs
 What: Using general-purpose persistent identifiers like DOIs or Handles for samples. What: Using general-purpose persistent identifiers like DOIs or Handles for samples.
 +
 Pros: Technically viable; DOI infrastructure is mature. Pros: Technically viable; DOI infrastructure is mature.
 +
 Cons: Lack of community consensus or metadata model for samples unless built on top of IGSN or similar; harder to ensure consistency and semantic clarity. Cons: Lack of community consensus or metadata model for samples unless built on top of IGSN or similar; harder to ensure consistency and semantic clarity.
  
-  * ARK (Archival Resource Key)+  * ARK (Archival Resource Key, [[https://arks.org/]])
 What: A persistent identifier scheme designed for objects of any type. What: A persistent identifier scheme designed for objects of any type.
 +
 Pros: Flexible, openly governed, used by some institutions (e.g., museums, archives). Pros: Flexible, openly governed, used by some institutions (e.g., museums, archives).
 +
 Cons: Less widely adopted in science, lacks built-in metadata requirements for samples, limited interoperability in research workflows. Cons: Less widely adopted in science, lacks built-in metadata requirements for samples, limited interoperability in research workflows.
  
Line 137: Line 147:
 ====5. Naming of communities that have already implemented the recommendation==== ====5. Naming of communities that have already implemented the recommendation====
  
 +GFZ Data Services
 +
 +Pangaea
 +
 +Hereon HCDC (?)
 +
 +Others?
  
 ====6. Documentation of the test to validate correct implementation==== ====6. Documentation of the test to validate correct implementation====
wiki/m4.0.1747748858.txt.gz · Last modified: by esoeding