I think this initiative sounds interesting, but both names are going to slip right through my smooth brain.
Interestingly, the funding comes from a package specifically on national sovereignty and AI, but other than machine interoperability, kinda doesn't really seem centered around it?
"Data Spaces" is aiming to leverage PIDs to link research outputs, but grounded in community defined/ driven principles. Everyone is invited to participate: docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1F...
Ok there is a slide missing, I think this is a name for the various things that the Alliance does,FRDR, Borealis, DMP Assistant, Lumaris, HPC Services... The Platform is about interoperability between these systems. Metadata reuse, integration, building distributive storage grids, use more PIDs/RAiD
Introducing the "Canadian Research Data Platform". (This isn't FRDR... This is funding? I'm already confused. This is launching now! But I think by launching they mean focus groups and consultations will start?)
The RDM Alliance (formerly Portage) presents "Data Spaces". Pilot funding program for research *disciplines* to advance governance, interoperability, data sharing, and platform integration. #OSCanada Goal is to build an interconnected Canadian Research Data Ecosystem.
I super appreciate the online stream for #OSCanada - but this is such a fascinating group of people who have been brought together that I really wish I was there in person to meet and chat with everyone!
Lucía Céspedes from Érudit/ UdeM notes that this whole conference is an example of the multilingualism of science, as folks switch back and forth between many languages, and that this is the natural stare of science, even though the publication record doesn't reflect this. #OSCanada
Meanwhile, publishers seem to be less scrupulous about this. (eg.s of Taylor & Francis & Johns Hopkins Press). Érudit want to continue in the spirit of collaboration and the interests driven by their community, not make decisions for them, or email opt-out emails during summer. ;)
Currently Canadian copyright law doesn't really answer questions about the usage for regenerating content. Even CC-BY cannot really be allowed for usage of training, because there is no attribution.
Last year, 25% of the material on Erudit is free to read, but not necessarily openly licensed. 50% of journals have authors as copyright holders, the rest belongs to journals, making the back catalogue hard to open up.
Used accessibility by design approach - notes the similarity of core values with Open Science: transparency, collaboration, engagement of communities. Not just ethical obligations, but proactive inclusion enriches the entire research ecosystem.
Another #OSCanada lightning talk: Training to increase accessibility/co create a set of professional guidelines for accessibility in bioinformatics. Created checklists, inclusive language guidelines, scenario based training resources. www.linkedin.com/company/idea...
These #OSCanada lightning talks are *fast*. I'm interested in the lessons from Argentina/ the Global South about Open Science under pressure - three articles from @humbertodebat.bsky.social that may be of interest to others on this:
Research is from unpublished research by Dr. Nicolás Alessandroni & Dr. Krista Byers-Heinlein, Concordia's Open Science Working Group www.concordia.ca/library/open...
Barriers to implementation are (mainly) lack of know how and need for more training. Institutional support seems to be another factor in implementation. Most institutions perceived as "average" at Open Science. Over half of researchers said they didn't know if Open Science matters for their T&P.
Presenters note the effect of policy in these areas, but to me, most clearly, the practices that people are implemented/ know the most about ARE THOSE CENTRALLY SUPPORTED BY LIBRARIES. #OSCanada
