Has anyone used Ro-Crate principles?
I played around with converting CLDF datasets to ro-create objects. There’s a lot of overlap between ro-crate and CLDF - at least for tabular data. What ro-crate may add - from my perspective - is tighter bundling of multimedia with CLDF data.
That said, I haven’t followed ro-crate for at least a year. AFAIU, one of the goals of ro-crate was allowing repositories to better display/describe/open up their contents. But I haven’t heard about ro-crate support in any major research data repository.
Ro-Crate would have the potential - I think - to be a standard for the next step of archiving language data, for example because it has a well-defined place for human readable collection descriptions (see RO-Crate Structure - Research Object Crate (RO-Crate)). It seems a bit unfortunate, though, that Ro-Crate doesn’t call this “README” like everyone else, but
ro-crate-preview.html. This terminology seems a bit narrow - I’d prefer the “look here first” semantics of “README” over the “archives should use this as preview” of “ro-crate-preview.html”.
Digging around on the RO-crate website, I came across a case study on using RO-crate for PARADISEC - linking to a prototype of “modern PARADISEC”. This prototype doesn’t seem to be functional, though. Does anyone here know anything about the status of this?
haven’t heard anything about it yet except what’s on the site