Related example
Indigenous data concerns → related restriction vocabulary work
2025 Living Data
The panel says DwC-DP usage policy does not yet solve Indigenous-data concerns and needs to evolve.
Watch 2025 at 1:23:51 ↗Read the source captions
Part 1 Q&A: effort, identifiers, complexity for users, Indigenous data, interactions, EML and extended specimens
over here. There's one over here, too. >> Go ahead. Sorry, I didn't get the question. >> That's okay. Hi. Um, my name's Jane Anderson. I'm from Local Context, and I just wanted to ask both uh thank you for the presentations and for the case studies. I wanted to ask um the for the case studies, how you might have been dealing with indigenous data and just pulling a thread through from the keynote this morning. And then this uh possibility of the data package uh opening up space for indigenous interests to be uh included. I just wonder how you're thinking about that as well. >> Very good question. Um the first and simplest answer is that we haven't gone through a proper use case and so there isn't a proper solution to all of the concerns that come up. However, there are working groups in Tadwig that are interested in these things. Um, one of which is sensitive data that can be >> I won't cross the lines here with the same kinds of concerns that you're talking about. So as >> this one >> star for maintenance group which is kind of responsible for all all of this we're aware of and trying to make sure that the solutions that are that come up there end up in the data package as well and it's middle stages in terms of determining how that works and also about integrating the care principles for example into uh usage policy. No, I I would never claim that usage policy as it stands in Dracore data package solves the kinds of issues that will arise there, but it needs to. And as all Darmman core things, it's a standard that's meant to evolve. An online question from Urit Pulen. I'm
2026 This talk
Tania Laity’s restricted-data proposal includes First Nations cultural significance in its reasons vocabulary.
Open on Vimeo ↗Read the source captions
A new standard for restricted access (sensitive) species data
the administration that you're dealing with. So as you can see there as an example. So the RASD reasons that we've come up with to form the vocabulary. So they're things like personal information and privacy, which may either be a lack of consent or someone's asked for request for privacy for their information. Sensitive species location, so this might be where a species is highly restricted, there's a threatened population, there's exposure via survey information. Don't know why it went-- Or a potential harm to people or property, or there might be a lack of information about the species. Biosecurity risk, so there might be trade species or invasive species. Species attributes might be something that might need to be restricted. So other people have talked about things like roosting sites or nesting occurrences. So that sort of information might be something that might be restricted within a record, not the whole record itself. And there may be usage restrictions on the data. So there might be a legal contract or other reasons for withholding the data or generalizing the data in some way. And last but not least, First Nations cultural significance. So there might be culturally significant species or significant information, or it might be a particularly sensitive or significant location, such as a sacred site.
The later talk provides related, concrete work on expressing reasons for restrictions.
About this connection
This does not resolve the broader CARE, sovereignty or community-authority question. The 2026 speaker traces the task group to a 2023 workshop, so no causal origin in the 2025 discussion is inferred.
