Our system has many grants that do not have a grant identifier, merely a funder. This is unfortunately common, and while we're looking to improve the situation, it nevertheless remains the case that many of our records record a funder but do not have a grant identifier.
The guidance says that "the property MUST contain one grant ID. A grant ID can take the form of any identifier provided by the funder, preferably represented as an HTTP(S) URI. In cases where the primnary resource has been funded internally, an appropriate internal code might be used."
However, it seems remiss of us to exclude metadata on funders where we have it.
Where we do not have a grant identifier, should we:
- not output a
<rioxxterms:grant> at all
- output a 'rioxxterms:grant' with a sentinel value such as 'unspecified' or 'unknown'
- do something else
I'd value any feedback you or the community might have! If there's a better place for me to ask this question, please let me know.
With best wishes, and blue skies
Tom
Our system has many grants that do not have a grant identifier, merely a funder. This is unfortunately common, and while we're looking to improve the situation, it nevertheless remains the case that many of our records record a funder but do not have a grant identifier.
The guidance says that "the property MUST contain one grant ID. A grant ID can take the form of any identifier provided by the funder, preferably represented as an HTTP(S) URI. In cases where the primnary resource has been funded internally, an appropriate internal code might be used."
However, it seems remiss of us to exclude metadata on funders where we have it.
Where we do not have a grant identifier, should we:
<rioxxterms:grant>at allI'd value any feedback you or the community might have! If there's a better place for me to ask this question, please let me know.
With best wishes, and blue skies
Tom