Phil,
There's also the fork of JavaServer2.0 that I did last year:
https://github.com/mediashelf/sword2-server
which changed the packaging from war to jar, implemented multipart/related
support and some general maven/dependency maintenance.
I did that as part of a very limited implementation of SWORD 2 for Fedora:
https://github.com/mediashelf/sword2-fedora
-Eddie
On Jun 20, 2013, at 3:22 PM, LEWIS Stuart <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>
>> I forked https://github.com/swordapp/JavaServer2.0 and implemented the
>> very minimal number of interfaces to get it to respond to some basic
>> SWORD v2 operations such as retrieving a (fake) service document and
>> (the very beginnings of) depositing a binary.
>
>> I called the repo "Minimal viable SWORD v2 server implemented in Java"
>> (though it's hardly viable) and you can find it at
>> https://github.com/dvn/swordv2-java-minimal
>
> Thanks for sharing this. The JavaServer.20 was originally written as part of
> the DSpace SWORDv2 implementation, but it was thought at the time it would be
> worth abstracting out the SWORD part from DSpace part, in the hope that this
> might be reusable. As far as I know, you're the first person to try using
> outside of DSpace (hence the lack of any other implementation or past
> experience).
>
> Richard Jones wrote this and may be able to give you a few pointers, however
> he is offline this week at a conference (OAI8 in Geneva). If you're
> attending Open Repositories next month, I'm sure he'd be happy to say hello
> and talk more about the code.
>
>
>> p.s. I'm growing concerned that this mailing list is so quiet (and
>> only admins can see the number of people subscribed). Have people
>> moved on from SWORD to some other standard? If so, which one?
>
> I just checked - there are 175 subscribers to this list.
>
> As far as I know, SWORD is the main contender in town when it comes to a
> standardized deposit interface to this type of repository. I've also
> wondered about the quietness of this list. I think there may be a few
> reasons: one, is that a lot of repository users are still grappling with
> their repositories, without yet getting as far as accepting remote deposits.
> Second, SWORD doesn't yet really have an active community sharing deposit
> tools. Partly this is because many uses of SWORD will be very specific
> point-to-point integrations, which might not be of interest to too many
> others.
>
> It would be good to hear a wider discussion about this, and how we share more
> about our individual uses of SWORD.
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Stuart Lewis
> Head of Research and Learning Services
> Deputy Director Library & University Collections, Information Services
> University of Edinburgh
> [email protected]
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:
Build for Windows Store.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
sword-app-tech mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sword-app-tech
