Advertisement

Lessons learned: on the challenges of migrating a research data repository from a research institution to a university library

  • Thorsten Trippel
  • Claus ZinnEmail author
Original Paper
  • 53 Downloads

Abstract

The transfer of research data management from one institution to another infrastructural partner is all but trivial, but can be required, for instance, when an institution faces reorganization or closure. In a case study, we describe the migration of all research data, identify the challenges we encountered, and discuss how we addressed them. It shows that the moving of research data management to another institution is a feasible, but potentially costly enterprise. Being able to demonstrate the feasibility of research data migration supports the stance of data archives that users can expect high levels of trust and reliability when it comes to data safety and sustainability.

Keywords

Research data management Data repositories Data migration 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work has been supported by the German Research Foundation (DFG reference no. 88614379), and the SFB 833 data management project INF (DFG reference no. 75650358). The data centre cooperates closely with the CLARIN-D centre in Tübingen which is funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF).

References

  1. Dima, E., Henrich, V., Hinrichs, E., Hinrichs, M., Hoppermann, C., Trippel, T., Zastrow, T., Zinn, C. (2012a). A Repository for the sustainable management of research data. In: Calzolari N, Choukri K, Declerck T, Doğan MU, Maegaard B, Mariani J, Moreno A, Odijk J, Piperidis S (Eds) Proceedings of the Eight International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’12), ELRA.Google Scholar
  2. Dima, E., Hoppermann, C., Hinrichs, E., Trippel, T., Zinn, C. (2012b). A metadata editor to support the description of linguistic resources. In: Calzolari N, Choukri K, Declerck T, Doğan MU, Maegaard B, Mariani J, Moreno A, Odijk J, Piperidis S (Eds) Proceedings of the Eight International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’12), ELRA.Google Scholar
  3. ISO 24619 (2011). Language resource management—Persistent identification and sustainable access (PISA). International Standard.Google Scholar
  4. ISO 24622-1 (2015). Language resource management—Component Metadata infrastructure (CMDI)—Part 1: the component metadata model. International Standard.Google Scholar
  5. Kamocki, P., Ketzan, E. (2014). Creative commons and language resources: general issues and what’s new in CC 4.0. Tech. rep., CLARIN Legal Issues Committee (CLIC), White Paper Series. see https://www.clarin-d.de/images/legal/CLIC_white_paper_1.pdf.
  6. Lyse, G. I., Meurer, P., Smedt, K. D. (2015). Comedi: A component metadata editor. In Selected Papers from the CLARIN 2014 Conference, Linköping University Electronic Press 116(8):82–98.Google Scholar
  7. Trippel, T., Zinn, C. (2016). Enhancing the quality of metadata by using authority control. In 5th Workshop on Linked Data in Linguistic (LDL-2016) at LREC-2016.Google Scholar
  8. Wilkinson, M. D. (2016). The FAIR guiding principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Scientific Data,.  https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2016.18.Google Scholar
  9. Zinn, C., Trippel, T., Kaminski, S., Dima, E. (2016). Crosswalking from CMDI to Dublin Core and MARC 21. In: Calzolari N, Choukri K, Declerck T, Goggi S, Grobelnik M, Maegaard B, Mariani J, Mazo H, Moreno A, Odijk J, Piperidis S (Eds) Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2016), ELRA.Google Scholar

Web resources

  1. [U1] The Dublin Core Metadata Initiative, see https://www.dublincore.org.
  2. [U2] The MARC 21 standard, see https://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic.
  3. [U3] The EAD standard, see https://www.loc.gov/ead/.
  4. [U4] The MARC to EAD crosswalk, see https://www.loc.gov/ead/ag/agappb.html#sec4.
  5. [U5] The Handle system, see https://www.handle.net.
  6. [U6] The Fedora repository platform, see fedorarepository.org.
  7. [U7] ProAI, see proai.sourceforge.net.
  8. [U8] The OAI-PMH protocol, see https://www.openarchives.org/pmh.
  9. [U9] Apache Lucene and Solr, see lucene.apache.org/solr.
  10. [U12] The Virtual International Authority File, see viaf.org.
  11. [U13] Example of a deposit agreement (University of Reading, UK), see researchdata.reading.ac.uk/deposit_agreement.html.
  12. [U14] Integrated Authority File (GND) at the German National Library, see https://www.dnb.de/EN/Standardisierung/GND/gnd.html.
  13. [U15] The Library of Congress Control Number, see id.loc.gov/authorities/names.html.
  14. [U16] The International Standard Name Identifier, see isni.org.
  15. [U17] On micro-formats, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microformat.
  16. [U18] The Schema.org vocabulary, see schema.org.

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of TübingenTübingenGermany

Personalised recommendations