Earlier this week re3data.org – the Registry of Research Data Repositories – officially launched (https://web.archive.org/web/20171029050202/http://www.re3data.org/2013/05/re3data-org-launched/?). The registry is nicely described in a preprint (https://web.archive.org/web/20171029050202/http://dx.doi.org/10.7287/peerj.preprints.21v1?) also published this week.
re3data.org offers researchers, funding organizations, libraries and publishers and overview of the heterogeneous research data repository landscape. Information icons help researchers to identify an adequate repository for the storage and reuse of their data.
I really like re3data.org, and that is not because I personally know several of the people involved in this project, or because they cited this blog (https://web.archive.org/web/20171029050202/http://blogs.plos.org/mfenner/2012/02/16/figshare-interview-with-mark-hahnel/?) in their preprint. I think that we are just at the beginning of building the infrastructure needed for research data management, and re3data.org fills an important need. In my opinion it is not enough to provide lists of research data repositories, we need additional information that can help guide researchers in selecting an appropriate research data repository. re3data.org has addressed this nicely by providing a vocabulary for the registration and description of research data repositories (https://web.archive.org/web/20171029050202/http://blogs.plos.org/mfenner/2013/06/01/re3data-org-registry-of-research-data-repositories-launched/10.2312/re3.002?), and by creating a simple icon system:
Possible values for each icon. From http://dx.doi.org/10.7287/peerj.preprints.21v1 (https://web.archive.org/web/20171029050202/http://dx.doi.org/10.7287/peerj.preprints.21v1?)
Future directions I would like re3data.org to take include: