Ingrid Mason wrote:
> -Is the assumption that academics all want CVs with a full listing of
> their publications correct?
I would contend that an academic who wishes to market herself properly
whould want nothing less that a complete CV in a single location
> -Do academics actually have to deposit their works in the institutional
> repository in the institution they work at so that they can generate a
> full (or partial) CV?
Historically, I understand that only 20% of research output is actually
deposited and, of that, only 20% is self-deposited.... which by my
calculation means that just 5% of research output is self deposited.
(this possibly conflicts with Stevan Harnards earlier comment of "15% is
self-deposited")
> -Are there other information systems in the institution that serve this
> purpose already?
There are other system, which some institutions may be using, which
provide similar services (the RAE/REF reports, CRIS')
> -Is it not feasible to expect repository software to enable exports (or
> data exchange) of metadata to import into other software?
Absolutely.... and they do!
(just not very well.... and too many repositories are 'tweeked' for the
specific institution.)
For example: is there a common Subject Classification?
The Depot and Jorum both use JACS.
GNU-EPrints ships with LCC
DSpace has a couple of scandinavian systems, out the box
> -Is not feasible to expect CV or publication list generating software to
> be able to import that metadata package?
It is feasable for a competant programmer to create a routine with will
export the data from HER repository into HER CV/Publishing system... but
as a general solution? No, not yet
> -Does CV or publication list generation necessarily have to be part of
> the repository application?
No - that's what m2m interfaces and data sharing is all about
Heck - call it Web 2.0 :lol:
> -Does repository software need to change to accommodate more than an
> open access purpose?
Open Access? No.
Open Interopaerability? Probably
> -Does repository software need to be more amenable to interoperate
> easily with other systems to enable CV or publications list metadata
> collection?
Yes
> I tend to toward the KISS principle: system interoperation and
> efficiency are 'good things'.
"Keep It Stupid, Simple!"
> But; how much is expecting too much from repository software (in terms
> of serving individual and institutional needs) and business operations
> without undermining the primary aim of maintaining open access
> repositories? What other systems are available in institutions that can
> manage these other requirements?
Or, to put this another way: does the current Repository Software
conceptually furfil the business needs of the institutions and authors,
or has the model changed since the software model was concived?
|