Matthew J. Dovey wrote:
> I'd really like pose the questions: whether and how we get the
> scholarly comms process back to being a communications mechanism
> during the research process - rather than the paper being the end
> goal and final objective of the process; whether and how we make this
> a continuous process of discourse, rather than a discrete process
> with the paper being the quantum; and whether I'm completely off the
> track here ;-)
This is my own personal view too.... the "Institutional Repository" is a
particular view down through a larger Campus Research Information
System, and the CRIS is the thing that the academics interact with.
This would enable systems to deal with the whole SWAP thing more
cleanly, and reduce (possibly significantly) the [perceived] overheads
of depositing with the current monolithic systems.
(Aberystwyth and Edinburgh are, to the best of my knowledge, working on
systems like that... both of whom are already running full IRs already)
Even if we *do* like the idea of a CRIS-like system, we still have the
problem, as Stevan has said, of getting deposits in. whilst such systems
are designed, developed and deployed.
--
Ian Stuart.
Bibliographics and Multimedia Service Delivery team,
EDINA,
The University of Edinburgh.
http://edina.ac.uk/
|