Friends,
Tuesday evening, Chris Rust suggested that we ought to develop a
digital repository for design research. With an eye to long-term
maintenance, he requested an offer from someone willing to provide
this resource with a commitment to long-term support. I offered to
explore the possibilities at Swinburne University.
As stated in a post to the list, the idea is that Swinburne should
provide server space and support while the Design Research Society
organizes a committee to manage content. This committee would make
all decisions on standards, governance, and policy.
Yesterday, the Vice Chancellor of Swinburne and the Deputy Vice
Chancellor for Research both stated that they support the idea. While
there is some way to go between the initial offer and a working
project, the way to meeting Chris's request seems open.
Chris and I conferred, and we decided to convene a meeting at the
Sheffield DRS conference to talk this over with interested parties.
We are also collecting names for the committee, and this may include
people who do not come to Sheffield.
In the ensuing conversation, David Durling suggested that a
distributed model might be better on the grounds that some people may
be concerned about one university controlling the repository. In the
model I proposed, no university would control the repository --
Swinburne would take responsibility for the repository much as the
Los Alamos National Laboratory is responsible for the physics paper
server. The DRS committee would control the repository through
decisions on standards, governance, and policy.
While I understand the concern over control, it never crossed my mind
that this would be a problem. Control and governance are determined
by the agreements that establish the repository. Once all parties
have signed the agreement, the agreement obliges everyone involved to
abide by the system we create.
As it stands now, there are two rough models for the system.
In one model, one university would provide a server with commitments
for long-term support. The server would be governed by a committee
that DRS organizes on behalf of the field. I suggested to Chris that
this committee should welcome representatives from outside DRS, and
the server should be open to content from the entire field based on
the standards and policies determined by the committee.
In the other model, a group of universities and design research
societies would form a consortium provide a server network. The
network would be governed by a committee that DRS and possibly other
societies organize on behalf of the field. I imagine this committee
would welcome broad representation, and the network would be open to
content from the entire field based on the standards and policies
determined by the committee.
There are advantages to both models, and there may be other models
still. It's up to the design research community. I'm committed to
supporting any model that works.
Someone asked me off-list which model we prefer. My answer is that we
prefer whichever model suits the community.
If you have ideas or proposals, float them here or send them to
Chris. Chris is on vacation until April 21st, so he won't answer
right away. Come to Sheffield this July and let's pursue the proposal.
There is only thing that won't work is losing track of the idea and
failing to follow through. We are ready to contribute to a digital
design research repository in whatever way the DRS committee decides
to move forward. If we all agree on that, we can launch the first
version of a Design Research Repository before the end of 2008.
Warm wishes,
Ken
--
Ken Friedman
Professor
Dean, Swinburne Design
Swinburne University of Technology
Melbourne, Australia
+61 3 92.14.68.69 Tlf Swinburne
+61 404 830 462 Mobile
email: [log in to unmask]
email: [log in to unmask]
|