1) The University of Edinburgh requires research data that has future historical interest or represents records of the university to be deposited in an appropriate repository. 2) Edinburgh DataShare is one of the key research data management services offered by the university and has worked to meet the requirements of pilot submissions from various research communities and data types. 3) Discussions at the Repository Fringe event covered topics such as depositing student thesis data, handling sensitive health data, supporting non-standard metadata and licenses, and ensuring long-term access to large datasets.

1. Robin Rice
EDINA and Data Library, University of Edinburgh
Repository Fringe 2013: 1-2 August, Edinburgh
*

3. *The data repository and
University RDM policy
“9. Research data of future historical interest, and all
research data that represent records of the University,
including data that substantiate research findings, will be
offered and assessed for deposit and retention in an
appropriate national or international data service or
domain repository, or a University repository.”

4. *
Edinburgh DataShare is
seen by the RDM Steering
Group as one of the key
RDM services offered by
Information Services, and
as such has challenged us
to meet the requirements
of a number of pilot
submissions from a range
of different types of
research communities with
particular types of data.

5. *
Single item deposit,
the dataset behind an
article.
Desire to get students
to deposit their data
from theses as norm -
need unambiguous
deposit workflow.
Fieldwork in NHS
means much data is
„sensitive‟. Permanent
embargoes?
Dr. Nuno Feirrera,
Teaching Fellow

6. *
Dr. Bert Remijsen
Chancellor’s Fellow
Village of Fafanlap, Indonesia,
on Bert‟s home page
Dinka Songs of South Sudan
collection, 62 items.
Used Dspace collection
template for metadata; files
uploaded by assisted deposit.
Also deposited in Max Planck
specialist language repository.
Annotations in specialist
format, requiring software
from Max Planck to read.
User happy with download
statistics, referring colleagues.

7. *
*The Listening Talker
collection identified for
deposit, ongoing.
*Very large video files
plus software as VM
image. Tar gzipped files
containing millions of
files. Several GB in size.
*Desires user
registration, non-
standard licenses and
checksums with
downloads.
Prof. Simon King

8. *
*Lots of „omics data:
not as many subject
repositories to hold
these as thought –
storage cost concerns.
*Interested in push-pull
of metadata to
websites, from CRIS
*Spearheaded by Data
Manager
Dolly the Sheep

9. *
*Fish4Knowledge EU-funded
research project
*Long-term sustainability
issues for observational data
*Search engine maintained on
their website – using METS
feed to locate items
*Testing SWORD implemen-
tation, 5% sample >10K files,
video + sql rows (3 TB)
*Efficiency & performance
Prof. Bob Fisher

10. *
*New member of
University
*Digital asset
management needs
*Nature of research
data in the arts
*Streaming & display
requirements (high
quality desired)

11. *
*Usability & user education
*Encouraging user to document and future-proof
*Relationship of IRs and and subject repositories
*Closed collections, length of embargoes, user
registration in an open access service
*Enhancing repo. functionality while developing new
systems (storage, data asset registry)
*Repository as golden copy/format
*Preservation procedures and SIPs, AIPs, and DIPs