|
|
rachel.heery
|
 rachel.heery
Member since : Jun-20-2008 (Verified)
|
| Votes Cast |
7 |
| Comments Posted |
3 |
| Topics/Ideas Posted |
1 |
| Topics/Ideas Tracking |
3 |
| | |
|
Ideas/Topics Posted
|
|
With acknowledgement for this idea to Owen Stephens' recent Tweet. My interpretation of this idea is that 'repositories' are best viewed as a 'type' of data store supporting a variety of services, embedded in various workflows. This fits nicely with Paul Walk's concept of a 'source repository' (see http://tiny.cc/FIHwc) being a simple system with complexity moved to specialised services. I suppose this approach isn't that far removed from the original OAI concepts of data provider and service provider, though the focus there was on access whereas now we are considering a wider context for repositories..
|
Comments Posted
|
rachel.heery
07/18/2008
|
I agree that in any communication we need to emphasise what repositories do, rather than 'the system'. I would still maintain that even at the most basic level a repository benefits the institution and authors through 'managing resources' (safe-keeping of institutional assets, integration with research information systems, supporting personal profiles) as well as making them discoverable and accessible. I think we need to have some focus on these benefits to the hosting institution that funds the repository and to the authors that deposit. I am not sure improved impact due to open access (i.e. making resources accessible and discoverable) is sufficient motivation for institutions to fund repositories, and for researchers to deposit.
|
|
rachel.heery
07/15/2008
|
Chris, I am posting a comment on this 'idea' though it applies really to the combined set of your ideas. I think the RRS you envisage sounds fantastic and would be a 'good thing', what worries me is the 'function creep' taking us a few miles on from some of the more basic, simpler 'few keystrokes' approach to repositories. The RRS sounds to have many features of a Virtual Research Environment, albeit perhaps a less data centric VRE, maybe more a VRE for the humanities and social science? I am wondering, should we be thinking about repository activity (funding!) in the JISC context as integral with VRE activity? or do we concentrate on the 'simple repository' until we have widespread uptake? I notice that the Intute Repository Search project sees integration with VRE as 'stage 3' in their plan, http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/events/2007/06/vic_lyte.pdf so maybe the answer is to keep integration with full blown VRE as longer term goal, meaning we need to start to take on board how the repository supports a VRE. Or following your line of thinking, is the repository equivalent to the VRE? I think de facto there are already other systems within research uni's that would need to be combined to establish the VRE (authoring sysstems, document management, data storage, research info) so maybe the repository can mature as a simpler organism a bit longer??
Rachel Heery
|
|
rachel.heery
06/20/2008
|
Could list benefits as described on the RSP site
|
Activity Stream
|
Vote Up
Vote Down
Close