Wendy,
Would it be possible to know how you are mapping the existing fields to
those required by the RAE? For example, for the Performance type are you
using the Note or the Abstract field to hold the performance description?
I can make up my own local mappings but it would be more sensible if there
was a general agreement about this.
Regards,
John.
On Thu, 18 May 2006, White W.H. wrote:
> John,
>
> At Southampton we have added some. Exhibition and Artefact are types
> that we already have up and Composition and Performance are currently
> being refined on our test server. Where we feel that the document type
> is a useful beyond the RAE we have been happy to add it. Others like
> Scholarly Edition we are flagging up through a checkbox linked to output
> selection in the RAE module.
>
> Wendy
>
> Wendy White
> Hartley Library
> University of Southampton
> Highfield
> Southampton
> SO17 1BJ
> United Kingdom
>
> [log in to unmask]
> Tel: 44- (0)23 8059 6873
> Fax: 44- (0)23 8059 3007
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Repositories discussion list
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of J.W.T.Smith
> Sent: 18 May 2006 09:30
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Input options in EPrints to match RAE Ouput requirements
>
> Has anyone implemented a modification of the Inputs options (Item Types)
> for EPrints to match the output types required by the RAE form RA2? See
>
>
> http://www.rae.ac.uk/datacoll/subs/RAE2008RA2DescriptionFieldsGuide.xls
>
> Regards,
>
> John Smith,
> University of Kent.
>
|