The current guidance for describing a Repository includes designating such as a ResearchProject. Although this may be a practical workaround for the time being, there are three drawbacks: 1) This approach makes it more difficult for searches to identify actual data repositories with success; 2) it dilutes the meaning of ResearchProject for the core purposes of finding research projects (e.g., funded scientific activities); and 3) nesting well below Organization, under Project, does not reflect an arguably more appropriate, higher-level categorization directly under Organization. Thus, please consider this recommendation of establishing "Repository" (or even "Data Repository") as a type directly under Organization.
The current guidance for describing a Repository includes designating such as a ResearchProject. Although this may be a practical workaround for the time being, there are three drawbacks: 1) This approach makes it more difficult for searches to identify actual data repositories with success; 2) it dilutes the meaning of ResearchProject for the core purposes of finding research projects (e.g., funded scientific activities); and 3) nesting well below Organization, under Project, does not reflect an arguably more appropriate, higher-level categorization directly under Organization. Thus, please consider this recommendation of establishing "Repository" (or even "Data Repository") as a type directly under Organization.