Would it be possible for DuraSpace leadership to contact them to explain the
problems with their proposal? I agree that this seems only likely to diminish
the relevance of their rankings.
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: Pottinger, Hardy J. [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2014 9:32 AM
To: TAYLOR Robin; Hilton Gibson; dspace-tech; General List
Subject: Re: [Dspace-tech] IMPORTANT NEWS: Important Info for Future Editions |
Ranking Web of Repositories
Hi, there is more cause for concern than just the handle issue (which is
alarming enough), re-read the announcement:
http://repositories.webometrics.info/en/node/26
They intend to no longer rank repositories running on ports that are not
cleartext (80 or 8080) which, I'm sorry, is completely wrong-headed. I will not
ask my users to send their passwords in the clear. It's not even open for
discussion. Even if we set aside the issue of login details, I am willing to
bet there are a fair contingent of researchers who would prefer to keep their
research activities out of a cleartext channel--despite the many concerns about
SSL being compromised, running a repository on port 443 is, I think, at least a
good-faith effort at securing the usage of the repository.
Is this port requirement an attempt to penalize institutions who embargo some
of their content? If that's Webometrics' desire, they will have to make a
better effort than to lump all port 443 repositories into that category.
It's a pity, I realize they have good intentions, but I think these decisions
will likely diminish the relevance of their rankings.
--Hardy
________________________________
From: TAYLOR Robin [[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2014 5:42 AM
To: Hilton Gibson; dspace-tech; General List
Subject: Re: [Dspace-tech] IMPORTANT NEWS: Important Info for Future Editions |
Ranking Web of Repositories
Hi Hilton,
It looks like a large proportion of DSpace instances would be excluded if this
proposal were implemented. It seems a bit over the top, I think we may reply
with a comment to that effect.
Cheers, Robin.
Robin Taylor
Main Library
University of Edinburgh
________________________________
From: Hilton Gibson <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Sent: 01 September 2014 19:01
To: dspace-tech; General List
Subject: [Dspace-tech] IMPORTANT NEWS: Important Info for Future Editions |
Ranking Web of Repositories
The Ranking is also a powerful tool for penalizing bad practices, with especial
emphasis in the awful naming proposals by software developers that ignore
librarian traditions and in many ways are going against intellectual rights of
depositing authors.
We truly believe the lengthy and useless addresses coined for the repository
items have a negative impact in their web visibility and affect the authors
will to deposit as it makes difficult the citation of full texts in future
papers.
http://repositories.webometrics.info/en/node/26
Hi All
Sorry for the cross-posting
How will this affect DSpace installations?
Regards
hg
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Slashdot TV.
Video for Nerds. Stuff that matters.
http://tv.slashdot.org/
_______________________________________________
Dspace-general mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dspace-general
