Top 3 concerns

From Embed

Wendy David - Walter

• Appropriate classification/metadata – appropriate for both the end user and for input.
• QA processes, editing cycle workflow and getting buy in.
• Selecting appropriate technology – repository tool and social networking tool to use with.
• When will RSP resources be available to use.
• Sustainability.

JISC DRaW – Sarah Hayes and Debbie Offen

• Senior managers are on board with the project but we are concerned that their decision making process where policies are concerned can be a very slow process. We would like them to encourage mandate to submit all research output and this needs to come from the top.
• Whilst staff share learning materials within their academic departments we want to encourage a workflow and culture of sharing via the learning materials repository – we are concerned that this could be a very slow process.
• Copyright issues. Specifically, full text access to the research papers.

Rachel Proudfoot – IncReaSe

• Scalable models –once you start to get higher levels of uptake, how do you maintain quality whist preventing bottlenecks.
• Is it possible to reconcile bulk ingest and IPR deposit licence issues.
• How should we identify/cater for disciplinary differences e.g. research workflows, collaborative practices and use of subject based repositories.

Rebecca Stockley – EMBRACE/SHERPA LEAP

• Lack of information on how to reference an “eprint” - a different version of a scholarly work.
• Metadata for non-textual objects.
• Making sure repository objects are accessible (in the traditional web sense).

Rod Rivers – CTREP

• Usability – implementation of policies in such a way that they do not discourage use of the repository.
• Collaboration and community – mechanism to be provided by RSP to support this.
• Software interoperation/interoperability – shifts in technology.

Storage Space/University College Falmouth

• Linking repository objects to VLE course reading lists – access control issue – the link needs to be seamless (single sign on/shibboleth/URL authentication etc) since we don’t want the students to hit another log in.
• Choice of metadata schema – do we use a common metadata scheme or different ones for different media types.
• Choice of repository software or develop our own to met local requirements to fit in with IT infrastructure (MS Exchange/Sharepoint network).

Wendy White – KULTUR

• How we work in tandem with relevant e-print application profiles development (time based media and images) so we can inform development/implement something – how do the development timescales and project timelines dovetail?
• Working with the creators of cultural research to look at how best to capture the work or represent the work – community engagement with their authority.
• Issue of re-use of materials – by whom and for what? How do we anticipate this and cater for it e.g. reuse of multimedia research output for teaching, possible use of metadata to create value added services – maybe even commercial.

Dr Maria Liakata – ART Project UWA

• Initial manual annotation of physical chemistry papers with semantic annotation from the ontology – how do we decide on the level of detail and how do we train the experts for the annotation, will we achieve good inter-annotation agreement?
• Will the publishers support use of this tool? How would they encourage/enforce this?
• Actual evaluation of the usefulness of the system. How can we prove this? Text mining? Which application?

Catherine Parsonage – Jazz Hub

• IPR issues specifically concerned with sound recordings and musical scores.
• Choosing appropriate software, hardware and hosting arrangements, and file formats.
• Ensuring buy-in within the institution and wider communities to contribute to sustainability.

Katharine Ellis

• Getting at overseas users under terms of MCPS.
• Increasing submitter confidence, especially re IR.
• Longstanding sustainability (transcoding) in absence of national digital archive service like AHDS.

Elizabeth Chamberlain – CHILTERNREP

• Set up of DSpace “record” structure – tips on a start record with suitable metadata (even if changes) for traditional and non traditional item formats.
• Implementation of all relevant policies – a policies checklist.
• Help with workflow design – mediated vs self deposit. Tending to opt for mediating all input but are we making a rod for our own back?
• Need to tap DSpace experience – vague, not sure what we need to ask yet.

LIROLEM

• Getting institutional buy-in to the project. What I mean by this is that senior managers are very interested in getting funding for projects, but much less interested in providing support and space for the actual project work. This also applies to colleagues who find it difficult to prioritise their workload to accommodate the project, especially when you are trying to create something that doesn’t currently exist e.g. a repository.
• Marketing the idea of a repository. Why is this of benefit to the practicing academic and how can they incorporate repository content into their teaching.
• Sustainability – how can we continue to ensure contributions of the project ends.

Sam Pepler – OJIMS

• Data use licenses/ownership.
• Data preservation – auditing data centres to make sure they are trusted.
• Lack of knowledge about overlay journal software. I need options, and there are few products and the functionality is not always appropriate.

David Piper – University of Hertfordshire Research Archive

• Deposit licence – protecting the institution versus not scaring off the depositor.
• Giving value to the depositor – finding the ‘killer’ reason that will encourage depositors to routinely deposit as part of the publication cycle.
• Future proofing – ensuring that the formats, data elements and standards will carry forward into the future.

DataShare

• How to integrate local services with existing National Services efficiently and effectively.
• Building trust with academic community in order to persuade them to engage with the project.
• How can we protect ourselves and our depositors legally.

David Lonjon – An Institutional Repository for Nottingham Trent University

• Metadata – we want to make sure we are using the appropriate metadata schema/extension to describe the right content to allow interoperability.
• Policy – having the right information and guidance to be able to create the policy to support deposit of content.
• A clearer map/idiots guide/health check for a successful implementation of a repository.

Helen Standish – ReSpace: Repository Enhancement for the IR@ Manchester Metropolitan University

• Staff training for advocacy and embedding: getting existing library staff to embrace advocacy of the IR as part of their role.
• Developing the IR to include diverse content – currently research output only, software issues related to this, using existing or need for individual repositories for different content.

Graham Stone – University of Bolton Institutional Repository

• Getting the policy right (or nearly right) first time.
• Missing the summer school (double booked) – need the start up help now!
• Confident about the scholarly content but worried about art & design (3D stuff), software etc.

Wendy Luker – An Institutional Repository for Leeds Met

• How do I establish a representative and sufficiently thorough list of user requirements which will enable us to select a software solution which is extensible to meet current and future needs of Leeds Met & its partners. And how can I do this in a reasonable timeframe?
• Do we go for open source/open source hosted by a commercial provider/commercial solution? We expected to go for open source hosted, but what if any limitations are placed on the project by pursuing this?
• What if concentrating on the one area (which I feel is the only practical way forward) alienates the rest?

Clare Jenkins – EthosNet

• Managing community expectation of that project will deliver and by when.
• Culture change and different rates at which this will happen in different institutions.
• Exit strategy/sustainability – we believe the business model is viable and service will be sustainable but we need to make sure it is so!

Sally Rumsey – BID

• Authentication – 3 different repositories with different access requirements.
• Non static datasets – Grid datasets and metadata, especially description and searching/discovery.
• Revision control – identifiers especially with non static datasets/versions.

Steve Burnholt – CIRCLE (Oxford Brookes)

• How do I persuade academics to share learning objects?
• Which methodology do I use for user requirements surveys?
• How do I manage my relationship with the 3rd party software developer?

John Harrington – EMBED

• Ensuring that needs/concerns/priorities of our user communities are fully understood, and that we are able to share this analysis with other projects carrying out initial work.
• Need to share best practice, what works – short time scale, can RSP help pull this together quick enough to help inform development of our new service mode.
• Missing other potentially useful work being carried out by other JISC projects outside the programme.

Louise Edwards – EMBED

• RSP need to be a real centre of expertise rather than just an information point.
• Proliferation of emails with details I don’t need to know.
• Building personal connections are so much more powerful than wikis blogs etc ie quality of communication is vital.

Jan Booth – Committee Zone

• User generated metadata – how can we ensure quality, will we end up having to review and edit everything ourselves? What tools and tricks can we use to get consistent metadata?
• Formats and preservation – the most familiar formats don’t always offer the best preservation profile, the best preservation formats might not have the best functionality.
• Cultural change – our repository model offers a new way of working. Will it be embraced or will we just end up duplicating work.

SAFIR

• Software – if we go commercial will we be able to innovate? If we go OS will we be able to get good developers?
• How will we be able to integrate with other repositories and systems inside and outside the university?
• How will we manage the different levels of ingest and access and satisfy our different stakeholders needs? i.e. I don’t want people to see ‘this’ but they can see ‘that’.