Yes, what's required are service interfaces offering interoperability between loosely coupled systems rather than a monolithic view of a CRIS / Repository - in the way Fedora offers a collection of services (deposit, search, retrieve etc.). Furthermore, data stored in a repository shouldn't be determined by Research management issues nor undermine OA goals.
Of course this is an idealistic view ..and the sun is shinning!
Antony
Antony Corfield
Technical Support Officer
Welsh Repository Network
Tel. 01970 628724
http://www.wrn.aber.ac.uk/
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Repositories discussion list [mailto:JISC-
> [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Anna Clements
> Sent: 22 June 2010 17:39
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Citation – a good CRIS, or Open Access policy?
>
> Agree with you both .. there shouldn't be a divide in what we are
> trying
> to achieve .. it's just that we are starting from different
> technologies
> .. the expertise and advocacy of the IR staff is required just as
> before.. just that maybe we do [eventually] converge to one system ??
>
> My original posting, I confess, was a little tongue in cheek ;) to
> start
> the debate .. but the issue is important and we are already getting
> the
> questions of why do we need two systems .. my response is that they
> are
> actually part of one virtual system (which is why we have the two
> linked
> at St Andrews) and I do expect them to become one physical system in
> the
> future .. whether this is a CRIS subsuming the IR or an IR becoming
> CERIF-Compliant doesn't really matter as long as the data is
> structured
> and meets the relevant metadata standards .. and is OAI-PMH
> compliant,
> and so on and so forth ...
>
> Anna
>
>
> Talat Chaudhri wrote:
> > Yes, I agree! But I was cautious because I know that others see a
> > functional divide that we'd tend to think is closing.
> >
> >
> > Talat
> >
> > On 22/06/2010 16:00, David Kane wrote:
> >> Thanks Talat,
> >>
> >> I think that it stands to reason that each shall develop the
> >> functionality of the other. It is much more likely in the near
> term
> >> for CRISs to start offering archiving functionality. It just
> makes
> >> sense to me. If I were a research director, would I not want to
> >> manage one system rather than two? I see the repository
> functionality
> >> becoming obsolete/subsumed into the CRIS.
> >>
> >> For the large number of institutions that do not yet have a CRIS,
> some
> >> kind of push in the direction of CERIF-compliance from the main
> >> repository developers would seem to be essential for them to hold
> >> their own. I realise that it would need funding.
> >>
> >> David.
> >>
> >> On 22 June 2010 15:21, Talat Chaudhri<[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I've seen two broad opinions on this:
> >>>
> >>> (1) CRISs and repositories offer different yet related
> functionality,
> >>> and
> >>> are thus complementary. (Clearly, not all information in a CRIS
> that
> >>> is used
> >>> to manage research from project inception to publication and
> other
> >>> outputs
> >>> needs to represent the institution in the public-facing
> repository,
> >>> and some
> >>> might be inappropriate or sensitive in some cases: commonly so in
> the
> >>> case
> >>> of financial and staffing information, personal details and so
> on, that
> >>> would be kept for internal purposes.)
> >>>
> >>> (2) CRIS systems could/should be able to offer granular control
> over
> >>> what
> >>> the public sees. Thus they effectively can or could incorporate a
> >>> repository
> >>> already, hiding all of the other information that should not be
> >>> displayed on
> >>> the Web. This is a more integrated approach than the previous
> one, and
> >>> perhaps a more "ideal" approach.
> >>>
> >>> I'd suggest that an institution that already has a working
> repository
> >>> will
> >>> naturally have a different perspective to one that has not, since
> the
> >>> CRIS
> >>> debate is comparatively newer than the repository question. All
> of
> >>> these are
> >>> specialist content management systems of one kind or another, in
> this
> >>> case
> >>> limited to publications but elsewhere addressing the needs of
> other
> >>> types of
> >>> resources too. It very much depends, from a purely practical
> >>> perspective, on
> >>> what systems are already being maintained, and on the costs
> involved.
> >>>
> >>> One ultimately needs to look at the needs of the institution in
> >>> question, as
> >>> they serve different parts of the sector and correspondingly have
> >>> certain
> >>> differences in terms of managing funding and research.
> Ultimately,
> >>> however,
> >>> the same overall processes are occurring everywhere. There are a
> >>> number of
> >>> valid ways that systems can be usefully put in place to support
> these in
> >>> practice. The point has already been made by Stevan and Anna that
> >>> what CRIS
> >>> systems do for research should not replace a policy/strategy
> approach
> >>> on the
> >>> part of individual institutions in making sure that their
> research
> >>> outputs
> >>> are provided to the public who fund them. This is what funding
> bodies
> >>> increasingly ask for, and is therefore what institutions will
> need to
> >>> provide, irrespective of the approach chosen.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Talat
> >>>
> >>> On 22/06/2010 14:02, David Kane wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> If we ourselves are unclear as to the relative merits of CRISs
> and/or
> >>>> OA repositories, then it is likely that university research
> >>>> departments may be the same.
> >>>>
> >>>> I can see a time when the functionality of the OA repository
> will be
> >>>> offered by CRIS vendors, managed by the research offices in all
> >>>> universities.
> >>>>
> >>>> Am I wrong?
> >>>>
> >>>> David.
> >>>>
> >>>> On 22 June 2010 13:05, Robin
> >>>> Beecroft<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>> Why CRIS value "as opposed to an OA policy"? Surely the most
> >>>>>> telling figure will be CRIS value *in conjunction with an OA
> >>>>>> policy* (as
> >>>>>> Keith Jeffery has been advocating for years)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> I did not mean 'opposed' in the sense of 'either/or'...
> >>>>> I meant to ask about the relative value. If the consensus is
> that
> >>>>> the two
> >>>>> are equally valuable and equally important, that is
> instructive. If
> >>>>> the
> >>>>> opinion is that one is not really important if it comes without
> the
> >>>>> other,
> >>>>> or one will have a very significant impact with or without the
> other,
> >>>>> that
> >>>>> is also interesting. I am interested if the community feels
> that
> >>>>> one is
> >>>>> more
> >>>>> crucial than the other. I do not see them as being in
> opposition.
> >>>>> Robin
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ——————–
> >>>>> Robin Beecroft – Research Communications Consultant
> >>>>> www.linkedin.com/in/robinbeecroft
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Searchlighter – enlightened thinking on information
> environments
> >>>>> www.searchlighter.org
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 17 Nicholas Road, Bristol BS5 0LX, UK.
> >>>>> Tel/Fax: +44 (0)117 902 4506. Skype: searchlighter
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 22 June 2010 12:28, Anna Clements<[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Absolutely, Stevan .. the two are not in opposition but need
> to work
> >>>>>> together .. the CRIS puts the content in the IR in a richer
> context.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> As can be demonstrated by our own setup in St Andrews .. we've
> had
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>> link between CRIS and OAR for several years .. but without a
> push
> >>>>>> from
> >>>>>> Senior Management [whether mandate, resource, or whatever]
> have seen
> >>>>>> little
> >>>>>> full text content [although over 17000 bib only records].
> >>>>>> That is now changing .. both because of funder mandates but
> also from
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>> ground up as academics begin to see their peers elsewhere
> quoting
> >>>>>> download
> >>>>>> stats etc for their papers.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Anna
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Stevan Harnad wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Tue, 22 Jun 2010, Robin Beecroft wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Anna poses an interesting issue with regard to Denmark's
> place
> >>>>>>>> at the
> >>>>>>>> tip of
> >>>>>>>> the citation league.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storyc
> ode=41
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> 2083
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Does anybody have any thoughts concerning the relative value
> of
> >>>>>>>> a CRIS
> >>>>>>>> as
> >>>>>>>> opposed to an OA policy with regard gaining a high impact
> rating
> >>>>>>>> for
> >>>>>>>> an
> >>>>>>>> institution's research?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Why CRIS value "as opposed to an OA policy"? Surely the most
> telling
> >>>>>>> figure will be CRIS value *in conjunction with an OA policy*
> (as
> >>>>>>> Keith
> >>>>>>> Jeffery has been advocating for years).
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Stevan Harnad
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Robin
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> ——————–
> >>>>>>>> Robin Beecroft – Research Communications Consultant
> >>>>>>>> www.linkedin.com/in/robinbeecroft
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Searchlighter – enlightened thinking on information
> environments
> >>>>>>>> www.searchlighter.org
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> 17 Nicholas Road, Bristol BS5 0LX, UK.
> >>>>>>>> Tel/Fax: +44 (0)117 902 4506. Skype: searchlighter
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 22 June 2010 08:59, Anna Clements<akc -- st-
> andrews.ac.uk>
> >>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Has anyone else seen this week's THE with a league
> table for
> >>>>>>>> most cited nations [based on TR Data]
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> See
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storyc
> ode=41
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> 2083
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Not sure what all the factors are but I do find it
> very
> >>>>>>>> interesting that Denmark tops the rankings but, as we
> >>>>>>>> heard at
> >>>>>>>> the euroCRIS conference at beginning of the month
> Denmark has
> >>>>>>>> only recently agreed a national strategy on OA ..
> although
> >>>>>>>> they
> >>>>>>>> have had a CRIS [Pure] at their Institutions for
> several
> >>>>>>>> years
> >>>>>>>> ...
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Anna
> >>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> _____________________________________________________________________
> __
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Anna Clements
> >>>>>>>> Project Manager and University Data Architect
> >>>>>>>> University of St Andrews
> >>>>>>>> Business Improvements
> >>>>>>>> Butts Wynd Building
> >>>>>>>> St Andrews
> >>>>>>>> Fife KY16 9AD
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> akc -- st-andrews.ac.uk
> >>>>>>>> 01334 462761
> >>>>>>>> http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/business-improvements
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>>
> _____________________________________________________________________
> __
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Anna Clements
> >>>>>> Project Manager and University Data Architect
> >>>>>> University of St Andrews
> >>>>>> Business Improvements
> >>>>>> Butts Wynd Building
> >>>>>> St Andrews
> >>>>>> Fife KY16 9AD
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> [log in to unmask]
> >>>>>> 01334 462761
> >>>>>> http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/business-improvements
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The University of St Andrews is a charity registered in
> Scotland : No
> >>>>>> SC013532
> >>>>>> The University of St Andrews is committed to sustainable
> practices
> >>>>>> and
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>> preservation of the environment ñ please do not print this
> email
> >>>>>> unless
> >>>>>> absolutely necessary!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> --
> >>> Dr Talat Chaudhri
> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> Research Officer
> >>> UKOLN, University of Bath, Bath BA2 7AY, Great Britain
> >>> Telephone: +44 (0)1225 385105 Fax: +44 (0)1225 386838
> >>> E-mail: [log in to unmask] Skype: talat.chaudhri
> >>> Web: http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ukoln/staff/t.chaudhri/
> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
> --
> _____________________________________________________________________
> __
> Anna Clements
> Project Manager and University Data Architect
> University of St Andrews
> Business Improvements
> Butts Wynd Building
> St Andrews
> Fife KY16 9AD
>
> [log in to unmask]
> 01334 462761
> http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/business-improvements
>
> The University of St Andrews is a charity registered in Scotland : No
> SC013532
> The University of St Andrews is committed to sustainable practices
> and
> the preservation of the environment ñ please do not print this email
> unless absolutely necessary!
|