 |
 |
Dear Torsten Thanks for offering to take this up. I'm wondering if there is any difference in experience for those who have Elements and DSpace and those who have Elements and EPrints? As I understand it there are several aspect to getting RIOXX working in the manner intended. Some of the work that has to be done involves crosswalking data from Elements into the IR for the RIOXX plugin (and getting the "right" data in Elements in the first place). This is a work in progress here at SGUL at present, but I have raised issues around this with Symplectic. Perhaps some of their customers have 'best practice' that could be shared? I was hoping for some of this at the Symplectic conference; we were asked for feedback on OA monitoring and repos tools, so perhaps Symplectic are also looking to see how things develop with institutions implementing RIOXX. As the Symplectic OA monitor does not monitor for RCUK compliance, there is a little gap there. Could the Symplectic OA special interest group have a special meeting on this issue with interested parties? Thanks! Jennifer -----Original Message----- From: OA Good Practice Project [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Reimer, Torsten F Sent: 17 June 2015 09:23 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: adoption of RIOXX 2.0 so far... Hi Montserat, I am astonished to hear that. We have been discussing wider OA support with Symplectic and I can assure you that they are well aware of RIOXX, certainly the colleagues who works on the OA features. Christine must have met one of the few Symplectic staff who are not aware of RIOXX. At Imperial, we are currently waiting for the DSpace plugin and will look into implementing RIOXX once that is available. I'd be happy to work with you and others to make sure that there are no issues with the Symplectic support - I chair the Symplectic OA special interest group and we can raise any issues through that forum. Best wishes, Torsten Sent from my iPad > On 17 Jun 2015, at 09:13, Dr Montserrat Rodriguez-Marquez <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > > Hi Neil, > > At Surrey we have Symplectic as entry point communicating with Eprints. We are currently in the process of upgrading Symplectic and my colleague Christine Daoutis reviewed our current mapping and proposed new mappings in order to implement RIOXX. Unfortunately, Symplectic's response was that new fields will need further development and they cannot do it during the upgrade. Furthermore, she attended the Symplectic Conference last week and during one of the session she raised the question of when they are planning to create or adapt fields to be compatible with RIOXX and the Symplectic representative didn't know anything about RIOXX! > > For me it's a surprise as the new version of Symplectic is supposed to support compliance with HEFCE and RIOXX is recommended by JISC to do so. And obviously, until Symplectic incorporates RIOXX, we will not be able to implement it at Surrey. > > > Montserrat > > Dr Maria de Montserrat Rodriguez-Marquez Open access advisor / > repository manager Surrey Research Insight My working days are Monday, > Wednesday and Friday. > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: OA Good Practice Project [mailto:[log in to unmask]] > On Behalf Of Neil Jacobs > Sent: 15 June 2015 22:04 > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: adoption of RIOXX 2.0 so far... > > Thanks Zoe, all > > Some people have replied off-list, with a variety of experiences. You are not alone in waiting for third parties to implement RIOXX on a hosted repository, so I have passed that message on to EPrints already. Others have said they are waiting for local technical capacity to become available, or for clearer indications from RCUK and HEFCE about requirements, or for the DSpace add-on to be ready (very soon), and some have noted that they would need to upgrade their repository first, which is non-trivial. > > I'd still be interested in others' views on this. > > Many thanks > > Neil > > > -----Original Message----- > From: OA Good Practice Project [mailto:[log in to unmask]] > On Behalf Of Zoe Clarke > Sent: 15 June 2015 10:15 > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: adoption of RIOXX 2.0 so far... > > Hi Neil - thanks for this information. I would find it useful to know other people's experience regarding implementation of RIOXX. At Edge Hill University we have an eprints repository, and the communication from them indicated they will upgrade our repository some time this year, and then implement RIOXX. Information of when this will actually happen has been vague, which is a cause for concern, as we would really like to get RIOXX up and running here. So we are a No.4 on your list of reasons. > > Zoe > > -----Original Message----- > From: OA Good Practice Project [mailto:[log in to unmask]] > On Behalf Of Neil Jacobs > Sent: 15 June 2015 09:23 > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: FW: adoption of RIOXX 2.0 so far... > > Colleagues on the OA Good Practice list, > > You might have seen this update from Paul Walk last week to the jisc-repositories list. RIOXX is a metadata profile that UK institutional repositories can use. There are a few reasons why Jisc has make RIOXX available and encourages its adoption, eg associated with RCUK and REF policies, and we're considering further action that Jisc can take to assist universities in this. So, if your institutional repository is not yet fully using RIOXX, then it would be helpful to know whether that's because, eg: > > 1. the direct, immediate benefits to your university are not > sufficiently clear or compelling 2. you have not been able to get > local technical support to implement RIOXX 3. local technical > expertise to implement RIOXX does not exist in your institution 4. you > are waiting for a third party to update a hosted instance of your > repository 5. the third party host for your repository intends to > charge a fee to implement RIOXX 6. it is not clear where data would > come from to populate the RIOXX fields 7. it is clear where the data > would come from to populate the RIOXX fields, but that's a big change > in workflow / systems 8. you are waiting for some other reason > > It would be really helpful if, either on this list or by email to me personally, you could let me know which, if any, of these applies for your repository. As is usual when asking for information in this way, I will summarise the findings back to the list, and will do that in a couple of weeks to give everyone a chance to comment. > > Many thanks > Neil > > -----Original Message----- > From: Repositories discussion list > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Paul Walk > Sent: 04 June 2015 09:35 > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: adoption of RIOXX 2.0 so far... > > In case people are interested in this, I run an occasional harvest across repositories in the UK which declare support for RIOXX 2.0, take a sample of the first 10 records from each of these, and run two checks on each record: > > 1. a check for basic RIOXX 2.0 compliance according to the rules at > http://rioxx.net/rioxx_basic_v2-0/ > 2. a check for compliance with the full RCUK requirements as described > at http://rioxx.net/v2-0-final/ > > The outputs of these checks are summarised in a table here: > > http://rioxx.net/implementation/ > > You can drill down into these results for more detail. > > Kudos to Glasgow University for achieving 90-100% compliance on the basic RIOXX 2.0 check! > > Still waiting to see a valid RIOXX record which completely satisfies the RCUK requirements. Who will be first...? > > Paul > ------------------------------------------- > Paul Walk > Head of Technology Strategy and Planning EDINA, University of > Edinburgh http://www.edina.ac.uk > ------------------------------------------- > > > > > -- > The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336. > > Jisc is a registered charity (number 1149740) and a company limited by guarantee which is registered in England under Company No. 5747339, VAT No. GB 197 0632 86. Jisc's registered office is: One Castlepark, Tower Hill, Bristol, BS2 0JA. T 0203 697 5800. > > Jisc Services Limited is a wholly owned Jisc subsidiary and a company limited by guarantee which is registered in England under company number 2881024, VAT number GB 197 0632 86. The registered office is: One Castle Park, Tower Hill, Bristol BS2 0JA. T 0203 697 5800. > ________________________________ > Edge Hill University<http://ehu.ac.uk/home/emailfooter> > Times Higher Education University of the > Year<http://ehu.ac.uk/unioftheyear/emailfooter> > ________________________________ > This message is private and confidential. If you have received this > message in error, please notify the sender and remove it from your > system. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author > and do not necessarily represent those of Edge Hill or associated > companies. Edge Hill University may monitor email traffic data and > also the content of email for the purposes of security and business > communications during staff > absence.<http://ehu.ac.uk/itspolicies/emailfooter>