References for: comment
Full identifier: http://purl.org/np/RA6Dyro4uNrPP88Nq6MFrKw1NP922jcRVMCKSHZk9DCUQ#comment
Nanopublication | Part | Subject | Predicate | Object | Published By | Published On |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
links a nanopublication to its assertion
http://www.nanopub.org/nschema#hasAssertion
assertion
|
comment
|
Barbara Magagna
|
2023-01-10T15:58:10.623Z
|
|||
links a nanopublication to its assertion
http://www.nanopub.org/nschema#hasAssertion
assertion
|
comment
|
Barbara Magagna
|
2023-01-10T15:58:10.623Z
|
|||
links a nanopublication to its assertion
http://www.nanopub.org/nschema#hasAssertion
assertion
|
comment
|
Barbara Magagna
|
2023-01-10T15:58:10.623Z
|
|||
links a nanopublication to its assertion
http://www.nanopub.org/nschema#hasAssertion
assertion
|
comment
|
Barbara Magagna
|
2023-01-10T15:58:10.623Z
|
|||
links a nanopublication to its assertion
http://www.nanopub.org/nschema#hasAssertion
assertion
|
comment
|
Nice article on a really nice, relevant topic. Here and there the structure/argument could be strengthened a bit, I made some suggestions for that (please ignore if not useful). Not sure how/if you can use it, but at Radboud uni (my previous jobs), we actually started DMPs that reflect this process, not so much with regard to FAIR but regarding what the researcher is expected to do according to the RDM policy of his/her faculty. The DMP included pre-given answers but with blank spots for details and indeed room to deviate if explained. If you are curious, I can bring you into contact with my Radboud uni successor to explore.
|
Barbara Magagna
|
2023-01-10T15:58:10.623Z
|
||
links a nanopublication to its assertion
http://www.nanopub.org/nschema#hasAssertion
assertion
|
comment
|
3
|
Barbara Magagna
|
2023-01-10T15:58:10.623Z
|
||
links a nanopublication to its assertion
http://www.nanopub.org/nschema#hasAssertion
assertion
|
comment
|
Barbara Magagna
|
2023-01-10T15:58:10.623Z
|