JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for JISC-REPOSITORIES Archives


JISC-REPOSITORIES Archives

JISC-REPOSITORIES Archives


JISC-REPOSITORIES@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

JISC-REPOSITORIES Home

JISC-REPOSITORIES Home

JISC-REPOSITORIES  March 2011

JISC-REPOSITORIES March 2011

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: What makes a good repository?

From:

HUNTER Philip <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

HUNTER Philip <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 9 Mar 2011 15:11:07 +0000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (63 lines)

Dorothea Salo wrote:

 "...from where I'm sitting, having run IRs for coming up on six years, a good repository is both simple and complex. Simple, because my definition is "a repository whose sponsors have clearly articulated what they want it to accomplish (presumably having consulted appropriate stakeholder groups), and whose staff and software successfully accomplish those things."

That's it in a nutshell. If you have those two things, then you have a potential business process worthy of the name.

Libraries aren't about publishing. They are about giving access, curation, and preservation, plus provision of some research facilities. No wonder the sponsors can't clearly articulate what they want the repository to accomplish, since the repository ought to be part of a move to replace the existing (and broken) publication process, and not just about making it possible to access to a few more papers than would otherwise be the case. 

So I agree. We need to clearly articulate what the repository is to accomplish. 

Great! So we've got a whole spectrum of opinion on this list about what a good repository is, and just a garnish of consensus... 

 Philip

*********************************
Philip Hunter
Digital Library Grants &
Project Coordinator
Digital Library Section
Edinburgh University Library
George Square, Edinburgh EH8 9LJ
Tel +44 (0)131 651 3768
*********************************




-- 
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.


-----Original Message-----
From: Repositories discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Dorothea Salo
Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 2:39 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: What makes a good repository?

So I've been watching all this with some bemusement and much enjoyment (really liked Ed's Five Laws of Repository Science).

Because from where I'm sitting, having run IRs for coming up on six years, a good repository is both simple and complex. Simple, because my definition is "a repository whose sponsors have clearly articulated what they want it to accomplish (presumably having consulted appropriate stakeholder groups), and whose staff and software successfully accomplish those things."

Complex, because (clearly, from this thread!) this is not the normal state of things in many if not most IRs. I have YET to understand what concrete, measurable goals many IRs (particularly in the States; I think things are a bit clearer in the UK) have been founded to accomplish. Believe me, I've asked. Most of the time, sponsors look back in bemusement and say "I dunno; what do YOU think it's for? You run one, after all; you surely must know!" This abysmal excuse for buy-in and support in high places is obviously not ideal! Should I try to articulate something, they nod their heads, say "okay, y'all repo people just go on and do that, then" and walk away without engaging on what would actually be needed to meet whatever goal I have outlined.

My regular depositors (now that I actually have some, which I do) are all over the map:

* a vanishingly small percentage -- approaching zero, really -- care about open access (sorry, but it's true)
* a very few want permanent, citable URLs for something (and aren't stuck on DOIs)
* quite a few want decent care taken of born-digital or digitized materials they don't have means or brainspace to look after (from master's theses to local newsletters to institutional records)
* quite a few want their stuff to be Googleable (and the IR I run has pretty good Googlejuice compared to a random uni website)

And many would-be depositors want things that I can't give them: a home for massive files (digital video is my bête noire), usage statistics, a bullpen for in-progress work, easy-deposit connections to their regular working environments, version control, "reserved"
permalinks (so that they can put the permalink on the poster or in the paper before upload), display environments tailored to different content types (such as image and poster galleries, or pageturners, or EAD viewers, or something like Sudamih's Database-as-a-Service). So all of the blue-skying in this thread is fun and all, but also quite frustrating to read, because *the software is not there, people; it's just not*. Worse, many of us IR managers, self emphatically included, *have completely run out of credibility* to ask for development and collection-workflow resources, because for some unimaginable reason we haven't thus far managed to meet goals that were never articulated for us in the first place!

As for sponsors, especially at the outset of IR planning they seem to want the IR to Magically Do Something about the serials crisis or records management or effort reporting or gray-literature collection or web archiving or the Death of Internet Culture or the Data Deluge or whatever. Explaining until blue in the face that IRs are not magic pixie dust, collection-building and culture change are *hard* and *slow*, and repository staff (especially when that's a single person) are not infinitely scalable never seems to register with such folk...
despite over half a decade of painful IR experience which has been plentifully and (by and large) honestly published about.

The sense I get from many IR sponsors is that they're not sure whether they want the IR to be a COLLECTION, a SERVICE, or an ADVOCACY TOOL (this last on various levels; some want IRs to advocate for the institution, some for open access). There's nothing wrong with any of those goals. Each of them just has to be policied, staffed, and organized rather differently. Lack of clarity on this point means that IRs and their managers try to serve as two of these, or perhaps all three, and they (we!) don't do particularly well at any of them. Which is, I can say with authority, a horrible hole to be in, professionally. I like to do things well. I don't know that I ever have, in this space -- in fact, I long since concluded I and the repositories I've run are dismal failures.

So, perhaps another definition for a good repository: "one that doesn't make its manager tear out hanks of hair regularly in pure unadulterated frustration." If there's one of those out there, I don't think I've found it yet... and I know a fair few repo managers, I do.

Dorothea

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
November 2005
October 2005


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager