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 2014

JISC-REPOSITORIES March 2014

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: Was DC OAI-PMH, Now Funder/Project codes

From:

Brigitte Jörg <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Brigitte Jörg <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Mon, 24 Mar 2014 14:04:31 +0000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (132 lines)

Dear all,

Just one comment from my side, as I have been leading the CERIF TG for 
several years. If you refer to CERIF++ with respect to vocabularies 
(semantics) - then yes, if you refer to the syntax, then no, I would 
say. Also, you have to clearly distinguish if you talk about CERIF 
relational or CERIF XML. They are two very different things and serve 
very different purposes.

I was not able to follow the discussion in details, I am afraid. What is 
the goal of this discussion? What are the requirements that have to be 
met? In my view then the discussion could be much more focused as it is now.


All the Best,
Brigitte




-- 

Dr Brigitte Joerg

Director jeibee.com
Board Member eurocris.org
Co-Chair Data in Context IG rd-alliance.org
CERIF TG Leader (2004-2012) eurocris.org

mail: [log in to unmask]
skype: brigitte.joerg
twitter: brigittejoerg


On 24/03/2014 12:22, Leslie Carr wrote:
> Now’s a good time to talk about what the default schema looks like for EPrints 4.
>
> Should it be the union of every stakeholder’s interests (CERIF++) or should it be really cut back to bare bones to allow repository administrators to roll their own?
>
> Should it be easily updateable over-the-air in a modular fashion to allow Yet Another Research Council Initiative/Mandate to be accommodated (rather like iOS upgrades)?
> —
> Les
>
>
> On 24 Mar 2014, at 10:05, John Salter <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> Paul,
>> Not sure whether you meant ‘EPrints is commonly deployed’ or ‘the out-the-box configuration of EPrints that is commonly deployed’… I'm sure there's all sorts of weird and wonderful configurations for these things out there...
>>
>> For a long time, we’ve had the following compound field, allowing for funder+grant (repeatable):
>> {
>>         name => 'funder_grant',
>>         type => 'compound',
>>         fields => [
>>                 {
>>                         sub_name => 'funding_body',
>>                         type => 'text',
>>                         input_boxes => 1,
>>                 },
>>                 {
>>                         sub_name => 'grant_number',
>>                         type => 'text',
>>                         allow_null => 1,
>>                 }
>>         ],
>>         multiple => 1,
>>         input_boxes => 1,
>> },
>> (Ian, hope this hasn't caused you any problems, and won't cause us any problems with RJB!)
>> Our issue now is that humans don’t enter things into our repository – it’s all done through Symplectic and PURE – but we’re working on making sure the integration of this data is done the right way.
>>
>> In days gone by, adding a field to EPrints was not for the faint-hearted, but now it's easy.
>> Maybe we need to look at the vanilla EPrints repository config and suggest some changes? (anyone have any idea how many new EPrints repositories are made each year?)
>>
>> Cheers,
>> John
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Repositories discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ian Stuart
>> Sent: 24 March 2014 07:05
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: Was DC OAI-PMH, Now Funder/Project codes
>>
>> Les,
>> Its implementation & management.
>>
>> Eprints certainly implements fields for funders and codes.... which it
>> stores as a semi-colon separated string.
>> DSpace, on the other hand, appears not to have such a field (though one
>> could argue that one of the lesser-used Qualified-DC fields could be
>> shanghied into that role.)
>>
>> Adding in option 3 is, as you say, not difficult - but requires more
>> change to the base repository that Paul was aiming for (ie, one needs to
>> add a new compound field to the database...)
>>
>> Given the idea is to create a platform-neutral data-format, one needs
>> both EPrints and DSpace to support it (given they hold over 50% of the
>> global market between them.)
>>
>> As an aside - I faced the same problem when I was constructing the data
>> packaging for The Broker. I had already gone for option 3 when RIOXX was
>> creating their guidelines.
>> In my case, I decided that it was a problem for the Individual
>> Repositories to recognise, and map, the funder & project identifiers
>> into a format that was used by their datasets.
>> To me, providing the correct relationship was more important, and the
>> IRs could catch-up as/when they could.
>>
>> On 22/03/14 14:36, Leslie Carr wrote:
>>> You're going to have to help me out here. EPrints has certainly
>>> supported Option1 (separate fields for funder and projects) since
>>> 2007 and could easily accommodate option 3 (multivalue fields for
>>> each). If there's any problem with option 3 it is that it would stomp
>>> all over the repositories that already implement option 1.
>>>
>>> What am I missing here?
>>
>> -- 
>>
>> Ian Stuart.
>> Developer: ORI, RJ-Broker, and OpenDepot.org
>> Bibliographics and Multimedia Service Delivery team,
>> EDINA,
>> The University of Edinburgh.
>>
>> http://edina.ac.uk/
>>
>> This email was sent via the University of Edinburgh.
>>
>> The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
>> Scotland, with registration number SC005336.

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

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

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