MIBBI Breakout – Day 1

BioSharers Recommendations

Recommendations - 1

• Overlaps between modules should be handled by developing a MIBBI CORE– Consists of widely used metadata elements, e.g.

species, geographical location, investigator name– Must be represented in RDF, using appropriate

ontologies, with good human readable definitions – Owned by the MIBBI Core Team (Chris, Dawn,

Susanna, …)– Encourage MI owners to use MIBBI Core– Allow individual MIs to have independent existences– Encourage MI owners to create mappings between

overlapping MI elements: MIBBI to publish mappings

Recommendations - 2• MIBBI should use standard identifiers– ORCID for researcher identifier – DOIs for datasets

• MIBBI should keep an up-to-date record of the latest version of each registered MI and active links to it from MIBBI page

• MIBBI should develop and recommend best practice for managing change, updates and revision requests for MIs

• MIBBI Foundry should define its modules and provide an automated API to permit querying for module updates

Recommendations - 3

• Vendors and Journals play key roles in adoption of MI standards– Who has authority to state vendor is MI-compliant? – What sanctions can be used for vendors that state

compliance, but are do not generate MI-compliant data?

• MIBBI should not pursue the idea of a Foundry Charter

• BMC Research Notes is seeking papers describing such MI standards