Another from the Research repository System (RRS) blog posts: Publisher liaison is maybe controversial. But why shouldn’t the RRS staff (or your library) support you in dealing with publishers? The RRS wants your articles and your data, and should help you negotiate and reserve the rights so that they can get them. So publisher liaison would include rights negotiation, submission to the publisher on your behalf of a ...more »
(i.e. emphasise benefits)
OK, I'll go the whole hog in relation to the RRS blog posts: At a very basic level, the RRS should [be associated with] a Persistent Storage service. Completely agnostic as to objects, Persistent Storage would provide a personal, or group-oriented (ie within the institution) or project-oriented (ie beyond the institution) storage service that is properly backed up. There’s no claim that Persistent Storage would last ...more »
The umbrella term "repository" conflates two very different kinds of services - services whose primary purpose is to preserve a type of media, and services whose primary purpose is to enable media to be shared and used by people. They don't look the same, they have different kinds of users and roles, they don't share the same concerns, and you use different language to talk about their features. Maybe we would get further ...more »
Again from the RRS blog posts: We don't think about identity management as part of the repository, although a really annoying early experience of DSpace related to the requirement for a completely separate identity. This seems to have been overcome by getting the librarian to do mediated deposit for you, but I don't have the feeling that the repository is well integrated into the institutional identity system. It should ...more »
A repository should be for content which is required and expected to be useful over a significant period. It may host more transient content, but by and large the point of a repository is persistence. While suggesting a repository should be a "full OAIS" has not proved acceptable to this group so far, investment in a repository and this need for persistence suggest that repository managers should aim to make their content ...more »
Managing data can be a big problem. Any data that might, for example, become supplementary data in an article, needs curating. Help the user by providing facilities to capture and hold intermediate versions of the data, ad the final public version.
Part of our work to examine the feasibility of approaches to improve the consistency with which repositories share the materials they hold (this idea), the metadata and descriptions of repository policies
Far from becoming irrelevant, metadata for repository items will
become more important but it will increasingly be created and assigned
remotely. This will be by automated procedures such as indexing and
text analysis and also by users and readers, through the use of
tagging mechanisms. These developments will have implications for
consistency between repositories and between items.
Most early Institutional Repositories were research repositories. Some are purely repositories housing digital objects as in "Repositories are "collections of digital objects"". However, since one of the primary aims is to showcase the intellectual assets of the institutions (as compared to providing Open Access to peer reviewed journal articles) another model was 'hybrid'. The use as a bibliography (suggested both by ...more »
Again, the Andy Powell idea. This one, I think, more about sharing, embedding, mashups. Think Flickr. Think sneep.
Inconsistency is a fact of life, and any repository instance or system that wants to avoid bottlenecks is going to have to accept items that have inconsistent metadata (and possibly inconsistent formats and policies, though consistency in those areas may be easier or more important to enforce). That doesn't mean you have to settle for it, though. It's possible to take a progressive approach, where messy metadata comes ...more »