Exactly - Slideshare and YouTube are both "repositories". There is no
"repository abstraction layer". It would not be meaningful to make one
(beyond the level of aggregating their RSS feeds, which I don't think
really counts as creating a repository!).
I think one of the big, big fundamental problems in repository-land
(both scholarly and learning resources) stems from what I think is a
mistaken belief that the "media doesn't matter" and that you *can*
have an abstract "stuff" repository. Talk about making a rod for your
own back! ;-)
S
On 28 Jan 2009, at 15:28, Fred Riley wrote:
> Lesley Carr wrote:
>
>> But that's exactly the practical implementation detail that
>> the repository layer abstracts over. So what if you end up
>> with separate tables implementing a complex metadata schema -
>> the repository takes care of that and hides it from the
>> repository manager.
>
> Ah, I get it (light bulb goes off above bonce). Now I can see why
> we're
> at such cross-purposes, Lesley - to me the repository *is* the
> database
> schema and all points upwards, whereas to you the repository is the
> layers sitting above the database. Almost a matter of definition,
> really
> ;)
>
> Cheers
>
> Fred Riley
> Learning Technologist
> School of Nursing, Midwifery and Physiotherapy, University of
> Nottingham
> Vcard: http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/nursing/sonet/about/fr_uon.vcf
>
>
> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
> attachment
> may still contain software viruses, which could damage your computer
> system:
> you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications
> with the
> University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK
> legislation.
|