@prefix this: . @prefix sub: . @prefix latest: . @prefix icc: . @prefix fair: . @prefix rdfs: . @prefix xsd: . @prefix dct: . @prefix pav: . @prefix np: . @prefix orcid: . sub:Head { this: np:hasAssertion sub:assertion; np:hasProvenance sub:provenance; np:hasPublicationInfo sub:pubinfo; a np:Nanopublication . } sub:assertion { rdfs:label "WikiData" . rdfs:label "SemanticScience Integrated Ontology" . rdfs:label "Vrandečić 2012" . icc:I3-Explanation a icc:Explanation; rdfs:comment "An important aspect of FAIR is that data or metadata, generally speaking, does not exist in a silo - we must do what is necessary to ensure that the knowledge representing a resource is connected to that of other resources to create a meaningfully interlinked network of data and services. A “qualified reference” is a reference to another resource (i.e., referencing that external resource’s persistent identifier), in which the nature of the relationship is also clearly specified. For instance, when multiple versions of a metadata file are available, it may be useful to provide links to prior or next versions using a named relation such as “prior version” or “next version” (preferably using an appropriate community standard relationship that itself conforms to the FAIR principles). In the case of data, imagine a dataset that specifies the population of cities around the world. To be FAIR with respect to principle I3, the data could contain links to a resource containing city data (e.g. Wikidata: http://wikidata.org/, doi:10.1145/2187980.2188242), geographical and geospatial data, or other related domain resources that are generated by that city, so long as they are properly qualified references using meaningful, clearly-interpretable relationships. It is also important to note that many different metadata files (containers) being FAIR digital resources in themselves, can be pointing to the same ‘target’ object (a data set or a workflow for instance). We can for instance have intrinsic metadata (‘what is this’) and how was it created (provenance type metadata) as well as ‘secondary’ metadata that are for instance created (separately and later in time) by reusers of a particular digital resource. These could all be metadata containers essentially describing the same digital resource from different perspectives. This principle therefore also relates to the good practice to clearly distinguish between metadata (files/containers) and the resources they describe."; rdfs:isDefinedBy latest:; rdfs:label "I3 Explanation"; rdfs:seeAlso , , ; icc:explains-principle fair:I3; icc:implementation-considerations "The considerations and choices made here are based on the same reasoning as the decisions made for principle I2. Vocabularies (often formal ontologies) of both concepts and relationships exist, and an appropriate relationship should either be selected from one of these, or “coined” and properly published following the FAIR Principles."; icc:implementation-examples "It is worth noting as an example that several “upper ontologies” such as the SemanticScience Integrated Ontology (https://bioportal.bioontology.org/ontologies/SIO) have a wide range of precisely-defined relationships that can be used as-is, or as a starting-point for a newly-minted relationship that is more specific than the one provided in the upper-ontology. The benefit of “inheriting” from higher-level relationships is that agents capable of understanding these higher level concepts, can infer at least a basic interpretation of the intent of the new relationship coined within the community, and therefore enhances interoperability." . fair:I3 rdfs:label "I3" . } sub:provenance { sub:assertion pav:authoredBy icc:FAIR-Principles-Explained-Working-Group . } sub:pubinfo { this: dct:created "2019-11-22T18:41:24.945+01:00"^^xsd:dateTime; dct:creator orcid:0000-0001-8888-635X, orcid:0000-0002-1267-0234, orcid:0000-0003-4818-2360; dct:license . }