 |
 |
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 ------------------------------------