$\require{mediawiki-texvc}$

연합인증

연합인증 가입 기관의 연구자들은 소속기관의 인증정보(ID와 암호)를 이용해 다른 대학, 연구기관, 서비스 공급자의 다양한 온라인 자원과 연구 데이터를 이용할 수 있습니다.

이는 여행자가 자국에서 발행 받은 여권으로 세계 각국을 자유롭게 여행할 수 있는 것과 같습니다.

연합인증으로 이용이 가능한 서비스는 NTIS, DataON, Edison, Kafe, Webinar 등이 있습니다.

한번의 인증절차만으로 연합인증 가입 서비스에 추가 로그인 없이 이용이 가능합니다.

다만, 연합인증을 위해서는 최초 1회만 인증 절차가 필요합니다. (회원이 아닐 경우 회원 가입이 필요합니다.)

연합인증 절차는 다음과 같습니다.

최초이용시에는
ScienceON에 로그인 → 연합인증 서비스 접속 → 로그인 (본인 확인 또는 회원가입) → 서비스 이용

그 이후에는
ScienceON 로그인 → 연합인증 서비스 접속 → 서비스 이용

연합인증을 활용하시면 KISTI가 제공하는 다양한 서비스를 편리하게 이용하실 수 있습니다.

FAIR 원칙 : 데이터 관점의 디지털 아카이브 구현을 위한 고려사항
FAIR Principles: Considerations for Implementing Digital Archives from a Data Perspective 원문보기

한국기록관리학회지 = Journal of Korean Society of Archives and Records Management, v.21 no.2, 2021년, pp.155 - 172  

김학래 (중앙대학교 사회과학대학 문헌정보학과)

초록
AI-Helper 아이콘AI-Helper

디지털 아카이브는 디지털 자원을 보존하고 지속적으로 활용하기 위한 전자화된 저장소이다. 디지털 아카이브에 대한 이론적 연구는 활발하게 진행되고 있고, 다양한 도메인의 디지털 자원을 기록하기 위한 아카이브가 구축되어 서비스되고 있다. 그러나 디지털 아카이브의 자원은 디지털화라는 본래의 목적은 만족할 수 있지만, 자원의 검색과 재사용에 있어 여전히 제한이 있는 것이 현실이다. 본 연구는 FAIR 데이터 원칙을 자세히 살펴보고, 디지털 아카이브에 적용하기 위한 성숙도 평가 프레임워크를 제안한다. FAIR 데이터 원칙은 디지털 자원을 기계가 읽고 처리할 수 있게 만드는 일련의 지침으로 웹에 존재하는 모든 자원을 대상으로 적용할 수 있다. FAIR 데이터 원칙의 평가 모델은 계획 수립과 적용 단계를 구분해서 정의하고 있다. 그러나, 개별 원칙의 적용 여부를 평가하기 위한 명확한 기준이 모호하고, 디지털 아카이브 분야를 위한 평가 기준에 대한 논의가 미흡하다. 본 연구는 디지털 아카이브에 FAIR 데이터 원칙을 적용하기 위한 프레임워크를 제안하고, 향후 적용을 위한 이슈를 논의한다.

Abstract AI-Helper 아이콘AI-Helper

Digital archives are electronic storages used to preserve and utilize digital resources sustainably. Theoretical research on digital archives is being conducted actively, and digital archives for recording various resources in heterogeneous domains are being built and serviced. However, although the...

주제어

표/그림 (3)

참고문헌 (48)

  1. Choi, M., Lee, S., & Lee, S. (2017). Research Data Management of Science and Technology Research Institutes in Korea. The Journal of the Korea Contents Association, 17(12), 117-126. https://doi.org/10.5392/JKCA.2017.17.12.117 

  2. Kim, Haklae (2017). Knowledge Graph. Seoul: CommunicationBooks, Inc. https://doi.org/10.979.11288/05141 

  3. Kim, S. & Kim, S. (2020). A Study on the Research Data Management Methods for the Condensed Matter Physics. Journal of the Korean society for information management, 37(3), 77-106. https://doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2020.37.3.077 

  4. Kim, S. & Oh, S. G. (2018). Key Factors in the Implementation of Research Data Management Services. Journal of the Korean society for information management, 35(2), 141-165. https://doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2018.35.2.141 

  5. Kim, You-Seung (2010). A Theoretical Study on Establishing Archive 2.0. Journal of Korean Society of Archives and Records Management, 10(2), 31-52. https://doi.org/10.14404/JKSARM.2010.10.2.031 

  6. Korean Society of Archives and Records Management (2020). Records and Archives Management: Theory and Practice. Goodwriting Publishing. 

  7. Lee, Geauchul (2020). Development and Current Trend of Digital Archive. Review of Architecture and Building Science, 64(5), 35-38. 

  8. Lee, S. (2002). Standardization of Digital Archiving and OAIS Reference Model. Journal of Information Science Theory and Practice, 33(3), 45-68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1633/JIM.2002.33.3.045 

  9. Lee, S. (2013). Trends Analysis of Digital Preservation Research in Korea. Journal of Korean Society of Archives and Records Management, 13(2), 247-283. https://doi.org/10.14404/JKSARM.2013.13.2.247 

  10. National Research Council of Science & Technology (2019). Guidelines of Research Data Management. National Research Council of Science & Technology. 

  11. Park, H., Han, S., & Oh, S.-G. (2018). A Study of a Digital Archiving Model based on E-ARK. Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management, 35(1), 83-101. https://doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2018.35.1.083 

  12. Park, O. (2012). A Study on Developing Preservation Metadata Based on PREMIS Focusing on Digital Data in National Library of Korea, 46(2), 83-113. https://doi.org/10.4275/KSLIS.2012.46.2.083 

  13. Shin, J. & Kwak, S. (2013). A Review of Literature and Cases for Developing Digital Content Archives. Journal of Social Science, 24(1), 305-330. 

  14. AFAWG (2017). Policy statement on F.A.I.R. access to Austrailia's research outputs. Retrieved April 19, 2021, Available: https://www.fair-access.net.au/fair-statement 

  15. ARDC (2021). SATIFYD: Self-Assessment Tool to Improve the FAIRness of Your Dataset. Retrieved May 12, 2021, Available: https://ardc.edu.au/resources/working-with-data/fair-data/fair-self-assessment-tool/ 

  16. Bahim, C., Casorran-Amilburu, C., Dekkers, M., Herczog, E., Loozen, N., Repanas, K., Russell, K., & Stall, S. (2020). The FAIR Data Maturity Model: An Approach to Harmonise FAIR Assessments. Data Science Journal, 19(1), 41. http://doi.org/10.5334/dsj-2020-041 

  17. Barbuti, N. (2020). Thinking digital libraries for preservation as digital cultural heritage: by R to R4 facet of FAIR principles. International Journal on Digital Libraries, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00799-020-00291-7 

  18. Berners-Lee, T. (2006). Design Issues: Linked Data. Retrieved April 19, 2021, Available: https://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html 

  19. Boeckhout, M., Zielhuis, G. A., & Bredenoord, A. L. (2018). The FAIR guiding principles for data stewardship: fair enough?. European journal of human genetics: EJHG, 26(7), 931-936. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41431-018-0160-0 

  20. Calamai, S. & Frontini, F. (2018). FAIR data principles and their application to speech and oral archives. Journal of New Music Research, 47, 339-354. 

  21. Candela, G., Saez, M. D., Escobar Esteban, Mp., & Marco-Such, M. (2020). Reusing digital collections from GLAM institutions. Journal of Information Science. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0165551520950246 

  22. Collins, S., Genova, F., Harrower, N., Hodson, S., Jones, S., Loaksonen, L., Mietchen, D., Petrauskaite, R., & Wittenburg, P. (2018). Turning FAIR into reality: Final report and action plan from the European Commission expert group on FAIR data. http://dx.doi.org/10.2777/1524 

  23. Corpas M, Kovalevskaya NV, McMurray A, & Nielsen FGG (2018). A FAIR guide for data providers to maximise sharing of human genomic data. PLoS Comput Biol, 14(3), e1005873. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005873 

  24. Cousijn, H., Kenall, A., Ganley, E., Harrison, M., Kernohan, D., Lemberger, T., Murphy, F., Polischuk, P., Taylor, S., Martone, M., & Clark, T. (2018). A data citation roadmap for scientific publishers. Scientific Data, 5. https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2018.259 

  25. DANS (2021). FAIR self assessment tool. Retrieved May 12, 2021, Available: https://satifyd.dans.knaw.nl/ 

  26. David, R., Mabile, L., Specht, A., Stryeck, S., Thomsen, M., Yahia, M., Jonquet, C., Dolle, L., Jacob, D., Bailo, D., Bravo, E., Gachet, S., Gunderman, H., Hollebecq, J. E., Ioannidis, V., Bras, Y. L, Lerigoleur, E., & Cambon-Thomsen, A. (2020). FAIRness Literacy: The Achilles' Heel of Applying FAIR Principles. Data Science Journal, 19(1), 32. https://doi.org/10.5334/dsj-2020-032 

  27. Devaraju, A., Huber, R., Mokrane, M., Herterich, P., Cepinskas, L., Vries, J., L'Hours, H., Davidson, J., & Whyte, A. (2020). FAIRsFAIR Data Object Assessment Metrics (Version 0.4). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4081213 

  28. Devaraju, A., Mokrane, M., Cepinskas, L., Huber, R., Herterich, P., de Vries, J., Akerman, V., L'Hours, H., Davidson, J., & Diepenbroek, M. (2021). From Conceptualization to Implementation: FAIR Assessment of Research Data Objects. Data Science Journal, 20(1), 4. http://doi.org/10.5334/dsj-2021-004 

  29. DTL (2021). European Commission embraces the FAIR principles. Retrieved April 19, 2021, Available: https://www.dtls.nl/2016/04/20/european-commission-allocates-e2-billion-to-make-research-data-fair/ 

  30. EU (2016). G20 Leaders' Communique Hangzhou Summit. Retrieved April 19, 2021, Available: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/STATEMENT_16_2967 

  31. FAIRMetrics (2021). FAIR Maturity Indicators and Tools. Retrieved May 12, 2021, Available: https://github.com/FAIRMetrics/Metrics 

  32. FORCE11 (2016). The FAIR Data Principles. Retrieved April 19, 2021, Available: https://www.force11.org/group/fairgroup/fairprinciples 

  33. GO FAIR (2021). FAIRification process. Retrieved April 19, 2021, Available: https://www.go-fair.org/fair-principles/fairification-process/ 

  34. Government of the Netherlands (2017). Progress towards the European Open Science Cloud. Retrieved April 19, 2021, Available: https://www.government.nl/latest/news/2017/12/01/progress-towards-the-european-open-science-cloud 

  35. Guizzardi, G. (2020). Ontology, Ontologies and the "I" of FAIR. Data Intelligence, 2, 181-191. https://doi.org/10.1162/dint_a_00040 

  36. Hall, W. & Tiropanis, T. (2012). Web evolution and Web Science. Computer Networks, 56, 3859-3865. 

  37. Haux, C. & Knaup, P. (2019). Using FAIR Metadata for Secondary Use of Administrative Claims Data. Studies in health technology and informatics, 264, 1472-1473. https://doi.org/10.3233/shti190490 

  38. Helliwell, J. R., Minor, W., Weiss, M. S., Garman, E. F., Read, R. J., Newman, J., Raaij, M. J., Hajdu, J., & Baker, E. N. (2019). Findable Accessible Interoperable Re-usable(FAIR) diffraction data are coming to protein crystallography. Journal of applied crystallography, 52(Pt 3), 495-497. https://doi.org/10.1107/S2052252519005918 

  39. Hettne, K. M., Verhaar, P., Schultes, E., & Sesink, L. (2020). From FAIR Leading Practices to FAIR Implementation and Back: An Inclusive Approach to FAIR at Leiden University Libraries. Data Science Journal, 19(1), 40. http://doi.org/10.5334/dsj-2020-040 

  40. Jacobsen, A., Kaliyaperumal, R., Bonino, S., Mons, B., Schultes, E., Roos, M., & Thompson, M. (2019). A Generic Workflow for the Data FAIRification Process. Data Intelligence. 2(1-2). 56-65. https://doi.org/10.1162/dint_a_00028 

  41. Koster, L. & Woutersen-Windhouwer, S. (2018). FAIR Principles for Library, Archive and Museum Collections: A proposal for standards for reusable collections. Code4Lib Journal, 40. http://journal.code4lib.org/articles/13427 

  42. Mons, B., Neylon, C., Velterop, J., Dumontier, M., Da Silva Santos, L. O. B., & Wilkinson, M. D. (2017). Cloudy, increasingly FAIR; Revisiting the FAIR Data guiding principles for the European Open Science Cloud. Information Services and Use, 37(1), 49-56. https://doi.org/10.3233/ISU-170824 

  43. Nitecki, D. A. & Alter, A. (2021). Leading FAIR Adoption Across the Institution: A Collaboration Between an Academic Library and a Technology Provider. Data Science Journal, 20(1), 6. http://doi.org/10.5334/dsj-2021-006 

  44. Niu, J. (2016). Linked Data for Archives. Archivaria, 82, 83-110. https://www.muse.jhu.edu/article/687083. 

  45. Sinaci, A. A., Nunez-Benjumea, F. J., & Gencturk, M., et al. (2020). From Raw Data to FAIR Data: The FAIRification Workflow for Health Research. Methods of information in medicine, 59(S 01), e21-e32. doi:10.1055/s-0040-1713684 

  46. Stall, S., Yarmey, L., Cutcher-Gershenfeld, J., Hanson, B., Lehnert, K., Nosek, B., Parsons, M., Robinson, E., & Wyborn, L. (2019). Make scientific data FAIR. Nature, 570(7759), 27-29. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-01720-7 

  47. Wilkinson, M. D., Dumontier, M., Aalbersberg, I. J., et al. (2016). The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Scientific data, 3, 160018. https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2016.18 

  48. Wilkinson, M. D., Dumontier, M., Sansone, S. A., Prieto, M., Batisata, D., McQuilton, P., Kuhn, T., Rocca-Serra, P., Crosas, M., & Schultes, E. (2019). Evaluating FAIR maturity through a scalable, automated, community-governed framework. Scientific Data, 6(174), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-019-0184-5 

관련 콘텐츠

오픈액세스(OA) 유형

GOLD

오픈액세스 학술지에 출판된 논문

저작권 관리 안내
섹션별 컨텐츠 바로가기

AI-Helper ※ AI-Helper는 오픈소스 모델을 사용합니다.

AI-Helper 아이콘
AI-Helper
안녕하세요, AI-Helper입니다. 좌측 "선택된 텍스트"에서 텍스트를 선택하여 요약, 번역, 용어설명을 실행하세요.
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.

선택된 텍스트

맨위로