... From _The Institutional Repository_, by Richard Jones, Theo Andrew and John McColl
p.17 repository and digi library developments more successful so far in the *discipline based* (than institutional based) areas
p. 22 *metadata*: the description of the object \-\- what was traditionally in the domain of library catalogues and done by librarians with degrees in library science, has had to be included by creators of digi repositories ... reluctantly. Traditionally the catalogue entry identifying info included:
*{_}author, title, contents description, publication details,_*
that's not enough for digi repositories; the first ones used QDC *Qualified Dublin Core schema* (15-element record to describe the content of an object); still in use and recommended as the minimum by OAI-PMH
other metadata schemas have emerged to cater for diverse repository types: METS, MPEG-21 DIDL, SCORM \-\- they are called *complex object formats* (they capture different dimensions of objects: descriptive, technical, rights, and others).
pp 24-5 METS: the Metadata Encoding and Transmission Standard (7 sections/categories of info)
p. 26 *repositories and research impact*: open access research papers (eg in repositories) have more impact: they are accessed more widely and cited more often than papers that are in restricted access \-\- according to various accounts.
(a paper "Online or Invisible", 2001, Steve Lawrence)
p. 28 Online access varies however among disciplines: one study compared philosophy, political science, electrical and electronic engineering and maths (Antelman 2004). Maths had the highest %, 69%, of papers in open access, but political science, with 29%, had the highest number of citations from open access papers. Arts and humanities are as yet behind but this will change when the repositories start filling up.
Acquiring contents/Approaching academics:
p.38 lack of interest by the research community in self-archiving: not enough to simply host two half-day seminars in the library (academics do not flock to the events and if they come, they don't leave inspired to make a permanent change) \-\- in chapt. 5 Advocacy
acquiring contents: slow and laborious way, liaison work full-time: targeting academics, aca research managers, research journal editors, lobbying committees, organising meetings in academics' departments = meeting them on their territory, going to research group meetings, repeating the same things over and over again to the same people ... getting author's permission and knowing the copyright laws
p.39 "the tipping point" when authors send their newly completed research straight to the repository (where the library is the invisible middleman/a manager of producer/contents access/user)
*OAI (Open archive Initiative)* [http://www.openarchives.org/] has its roots in the open access and institutional repository movements. Continued support of this work remains a cornerstone of the Open Archives program. Over time, however, the work of OAI has expanded to promote broad access to digital resources for eScholarship, eLearning, and eScience.
DSpace is a joint MIT and HP digi repository software
*Introducing DSpace*
DSpace is a groundbreaking digital repository system that captures, stores, indexes, preserves, and redistributes an organization's research data.
*What Can DSpace Do?*
Jointly developed by MIT Libraries and Hewlett-Packard Labs, the DSpace software platform serves a variety of digital archiving needs.
Research institutions worldwide use DSpace to meet a variety of digital archiving needs:
* Institutional Repositories (IRs)
* Learning Object Repositories (LORs)
* eTheses
* Electronic Records Management (ERM)
* Digital Preservation
* Publishing
* and more
An intro for faculties can be found here: [http://dspace.org/introduction/intro-faculty.html]
*Welcome to DSpace at MIT, MIT's online institutional repository - built to save, share, and search MIT's digital research materials.*
* Over 14,000 MIT Theses added\!
* Individual MIT faculty & researchers, create your own collections in DSpace.
[http://dspace.mit.edu/]
*Search* allows you to Enter text in the box below to search DSpace.*Communities in DSpace* allows you to choose a community to browse its collections.
Persistent address system \-\- links won't get broken
update of formats \-\- continuity of access, not like the Digi-Domesday,
see [http://www.domesdaybook.co.uk/faqs.html#1]
{color:#000099}{*}I took part in the 'New Domesday' survey in the 1980s - where can I find the information that was collected?*{color}
Around a million people contributed to a snapshot of modern England in 1986 and the results, including a lot of multimedia, were compiled onto computer disks and put on sale. It ran into problems as the disks were only compatible with a special type of computer which was very expensive to buy. Subsequently very few of the disks were sold, and today only a handful remain, all rather worse for wear. A project to extract the information off the best preserved disks and put it on more widely available media has begun, but it will be several years before the full results will be seen again. For more details about the situation see the following articles:
- Guardian, March 2002 - "Digital Domesday Book lasts 15 years not 1000"
- BBC World, February 2003 - "Dead Domesday Data"
- CAMiLEON Project - Rescuing BBC Domesday
- ATSF - Domesday Redux; Preservation and Emulation of BBC Domesday |
