Hello all,

My colleague Marieke Polhout brought this discussion to my attention, which prompted me to subscribe and join in.
I am Valentijn, one of the data managers at DANS. I work primarily with archaeological datasets, but occasionally with data from other disciplines as well.

Additionally, I am leading the DANS Preferred Format workgroup. We only started this workgroup in the summer and are currently in the process of writing up the first results. Our main task was to revise and update the existing DANS Preferred Formats document, of which the Dutch version was mentioned in this discussion (yes, there's an English one as well: http://www.dans.knaw.nl/sites/default/files/file/EASY/DANS%20preferred%20formats%20UK%20DEF.pdf).

So I completely agree that the published list is lacking to some extent, and the comment regarding the lumping of .xls with .xlsx is definitely very valid. A new document will be published within the next month, which should also detail all file types with an explanation of why we chose our preferred formats; how certain file types may be handled and if there are any specific factors to be aware of (such as significant properties).

As for the thread question: DANS' primary goal is to provide sustained access to research data. Archiving in, and re-using data from, the on-line trusted digital repository EASY is one of DANS' primary services. For the purposes of access and preservation, DANS stongly encourages the use of preferred formats and will guide depositors to the use of those formats as much as possible. Acceptable formats will usually be allowed in the archive as well - we would then look at the data and see whether there are good reasons to use the selected format, and/or if other (preferred) options might be provided.
And the same goes for formats which are not on the list. For those, we would ask our users to contact us first, so we can look into the formats and check for options, issues, dangers, ... In theory, we are open to all kinds of data. We might hypothetically restrict deposits of data to preferred formats from certain sources (ie in specific projects, with specific funding, ...). We definitely aim for the use of preferred formats as much as possible.

But with all this, I should also stress that our Preferred Formats list is far from static. After we release our update, we will periodically check for developments, react to new formats we encounter and we will continuously want to involve ourselves in worldwide discussions on the topic(s) of formats.