Thanks, Mike. So, to get specific, should I answer the survey for the 
Internet Archive? It's not academic, it's not necessarily scholarly, but 
it's about everything else you mention here.

kc

Michael J. Giarlo wrote:
> I try to avoid defining 'repository'.  Institutional repositories and
> subject repositories like arxiv.org are clearly 'repositories', but beyond
> that, you're right, it is somewhat ill-defined.  One might look to the
> Kahn-Wilensky architecture [1], or the OAIS reference model [2], or even
> Wikipedia [3] for definitions, but it's not clear that even the authorities
> agree on what makes a repository.  It's a system.  It's network-accessible
> and typically has a web interface of some sort.  Files and groups of files
> sometimes known as objects tend to be deposited in them, perhaps for some
> combination of management, access, or preservation.  Many run Fedora,
> DSpace, and ePrints, and factor heavily in scholarly communication.  Some
> are document-centric.  Some will accept anything.  To some, a learning
> management system may be a repo.  To others, a content management system.
>
> My background is in academia so my own definition is somewhat biased, but I
> wouldn't say it is necessarily limited in the way you ask.  Re: the I2 page
> you mention: I2's work is currently separated into a few separate
> "scenarios", one of which is oriented around repositories, and that's where
> the survey comes from.  The other scenarios are for library workflows and
> electronic resources, so it's safe to assume that repository does not mean
> ILS or OPAC or ERP system.
>
> My hope is that folks have their own working definitions of the term and can
> decide for themselves what it means.  But great question, Karen!
>
> -Mike
>
> 1. http://www.cnri.reston.va.us/k-w.html
> 2. http://public.ccsds.org/publications/archive/650x0b1.pdf
> 3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_repository
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 15:15, Karen Coyle<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>   
>> How do you define 'repository'? I know that's a hard question, but i'm
>>     
> just
>   
>> not sure who should answer. Is it limited to places where academics store
>> their own works? The I2 page on the NISO site seems to be more inclusive,
>> citing "all library and publishing environments."
>>
>> kc
>>
>> Michael J. Giarlo wrote:
>>     
>>> The NISO I2 Working Group is surveying repository managers to
>>> determine the current practices and needs of the repository community
>>> regarding institutional identifiers.  We value your time and your
>>> input in the process to create a standard for a new institutional
>>> identifier.
>>>
>>> We hope that you will complete the survey which should take less than
>>> 15 minutes.  The survey will remain open through Monday, July 6th.
>>>
>>> Here is a link to the survey:
>>> http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=RGQgZ3090DVrb3kFzr3P3Q_3d_3d
>>>
>>> Please feel free to share this message with other interested parties.
>>>
>>> Thanks for your participation!  (And apologies for massive
>>> cross-posting; this is a fragmented community.)
>>>
>>> -Mike
>>> Co-chair, Repositories scenario, NISO I2 Working Group
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>       
>> --
>> -----------------------------------
>> Karen Coyle / Digital Library Consultant
>> [log in to unmask] http://www.kcoyle.net
>> ph.: 510-540-7596   skype: kcoylenet
>> fx.: 510-848-3913
>> mo.: 510-435-8234
>> ------------------------------------
>>
>>     
>
>
>   


-- 
-----------------------------------
Karen Coyle / Digital Library Consultant
[log in to unmask] http://www.kcoyle.net
ph.: 510-540-7596   skype: kcoylenet
fx.: 510-848-3913
mo.: 510-435-8234
------------------------------------