Although the similarity of criteria within the DSA and FAIR demonstrate consistency of standards of quality, we identified some complications with defining the terms of each principle independently in the FAIR principles. In other words, the outline of principles seemed to us ambiguous and revealed some dependencies on other principles. For example, in the image above the term ‘accessible’ is included under both the Interoperable and Reusable principles.
This was problematic because, our interest in the taiwan rcs data principles comes from an assessment point of view as our goal is to implement the principles into an assessment tool (for rating the quality of datasets). Thus, it would be almost impossible to use dependent principles in this type of implementation because it means a dataset cannot be rated on each principle independently, leading to a messy outcome and perhaps inaccurate interpretations of the overall dataset review.
We have therefore started working on a new operationalisation of the FAIR principles in a way which allows the principles to be described independently, meaning that a rating of a dataset under one principle is entirely independent from its scores under the other principles.