Last week I added this topic to the agenda for the DSpace Developers/DCAT
meeting. I think it's imperative that we start talking about this sooner rather
than later as this will have an enormous impact on immediate DSpace development
as well as the DSpace Futures work.
Sarah
Sarah L. Shreeves
IDEALS Coordinator - http://ideals.illinois.edu/
Scholarly Commons Co-Coordinator - http://library.illinois.edu/sc/
Associate Professor, University Library
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
217-244-3877
From: Michele Kimpton [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2013 12:38 PM
To: dtpalmer
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Dspace-general] Draft Agenda for Open Repositories 2013 DSpace
Developers/DCAT Meeting
Hi David and DSpace community,
I wanted to make everyone aware of a proposal that is making its way to the
Whitehouse that could possibly have implications for open access repositories
in the USA, including DSpace.
Here is the link to the proposal:
http://www.arl.org/storage/documents/publications/share-proposal-07june13.pdf
This proposal is being submitted as a response to the OSTP call for open
access and preservation to data and scholarly publications. The publishers
are making a big push to do it, and this is the Universities response. What is
interesting is that academic libraries (ARL) and Presidents of Universities
(AAU) have come together to write this proposal. They are proposing a
federated network of currently established digital repositories with
DPN(www.dpn.org<http://www.dpn.org>) as the preservation backbone. That means
they are proposing to use in many cases their current repositories, either
DSpace or Fedora and implement common metadata and protocols so they can be
aggregated. One of the requirements of the repository is to have a PI
identifier such as ORCID implemented.
If this proposal is accepted by the Whitehouse, the stakeholders of DSpace in
the USA will need to come together to decide if and how it will meet the
requirements outlined in SHARE. We have a much higher probability of success
to get the work done collaboratively and for all to benefit I believe, than
working independently to satisfy the requirements outlined.
I would be interested in talking with folks further about this topic at OR13.
Look forward to seeing many of you there.
best,
Michele Kimpton
On Jul 1, 2013, at 5:04 PM, dtpalmer <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
wrote:
Dear All,
Per Hilton's email below, indeed yes, I wish to see ORCID and DSpace-CRIS made
core to future DSpace development.
I've been scratching my head wondering how to get more traction for DSpace-CRIS
within the DSpace community. After presenting on this topic at the ALA
conference this week in Chicago, I discussed the situation with colleagues here.
Most libraries in the US run DSpace for publications of one sort or another.
Author profile initiatives such as Vivo seem to be moving to depts other than
the library. Then Vivo for author profiles and DSpace for publications will
remain separate systems, managed by different depts.
However for most institutions, collecting, describing and contextualizing
research objects beyond publications is still blue sky. Most institutions have
not done it yet. It is an area that libraries, already with a publication
respository, could move into very easily now in these early days. The work we
have done for DSpace-CRIS could facilitate.
Hoping for more dance partners,
David Palmer
The University of Hong Kong
From: Hilton Gibson <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>"
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>,
Duraspace
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: [Irtalk] Fwd: [Dspace-devel] Draft Agenda for Open
Repositories 2013 DSpace Developers/DCAT Meeting
Message-ID:
<CAAV1Wv40RbjrH7a9GUj0Cabo9fzkrgngQcgGs=5wzhnzqv5...@mail.gmail.com<mailto:CAAV1Wv40RbjrH7a9GUj0Cabo9fzkrgngQcgGs=5wzhnzqv5...@mail.gmail.com>>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Hi All
Please review the agenda.
I see the matter of researcher ID's is not on the agenda.
How do we prove to researchers the impact of openness if we cannot properly
identify them in the first place.
I think this is crucial for advocacy in the long term.
The CRIS module recently released by the HKU should be a core part of
DSpace and so should ORCID ID's.
If you agree then please send an email to:
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dspace-general requesting these
core additions to DSpace before the meeting.
Cheers
hg
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net<http://SF.net> email is sponsored by Windows:
Build for Windows Store.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev_______________________________________________
Dspace-general mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dspace-general
Michele Kimpton
Chief Executive Officer
DuraSpace organization
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:
Build for Windows Store.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Dspace-general mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dspace-general
