Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

ReStore: A sustainable web resources repository, Arshad Khan, National Centre for Research Methods


Published on

Presentation given at JISC-PoWR workshop 1 (Preservation of Web Resources: Making a Start), Dr Seng Tee Lee Room at Senate House Library, University of London:

Published in: Technology, Design
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

ReStore: A sustainable web resources repository, Arshad Khan, National Centre for Research Methods

  1. 1. R e Store : A sustainable web resources repository Arshad A. Khan National Centre for Research Methods
  2. 2. <ul><li>Explain the rationale for ReStore, what it is and what it isn’t </li></ul><ul><li>Explain how it is intended to work </li></ul><ul><li>R e Store & restored resources site demo </li></ul><ul><li>Hopes for today’s workshop </li></ul><ul><li>Questions </li></ul>Overview
  3. 3. <ul><li>ESRC investments producing online resources </li></ul><ul><li>Completed near to end of project funding </li></ul><ul><li>Often of great practical value, but immediately begin to decay </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Dated content (broken links - new ideas) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Changed technical environment </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Lack of maintenance/visibility </li></ul>Why do we need to R e Store?
  4. 4. <ul><li>Repository for online resources </li></ul><ul><li>Restoring quality and utility </li></ul><ul><li>Promoting accessibility </li></ul><ul><li>Sustainable service identity </li></ul><ul><li>Being implemented by NCRM </li></ul>Why R e Store?
  5. 5. <ul><li>Build a prototype service for sustaining online resources </li></ul><ul><li>Focus on research methods initiatives </li></ul><ul><ul><li>RMP, NCRM, RDI, QMI </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Lead development of an ESRC strategy for the longer term </li></ul><ul><li>A “working experiment” with immediate practical benefits </li></ul>Aims of the project
  6. 6. <ul><li>A static web archive </li></ul><ul><li>A continuation funding model for completed projects </li></ul><ul><li>A research methods advice service </li></ul><ul><li>A document repository </li></ul><ul><li>A virtual learning environment </li></ul>Not aims of the project
  7. 7. <ul><li>Identify candidate resources </li></ul><ul><li>Work with original resource authors </li></ul><ul><li>Technical and academic review </li></ul><ul><li>Assess value and work required </li></ul><ul><li>Technical and academic updating </li></ul><ul><li>Transfer into ReStore service </li></ul><ul><li>Promote use and review </li></ul>Basic approach
  8. 8. <ul><li>Significant online content: not just project sites or documents </li></ul><ul><li>Initial demonstrator resources </li></ul><ul><li>Main phase – aim of working with suitable RMP, RDI, NCRM, QMI resources that are not being maintained – via programme directors </li></ul><ul><li>Mature phase – perhaps triggered by end of awards? </li></ul>Selection of resources for review
  9. 9. <ul><li>Parallel technical, academic and author reviews </li></ul><ul><li>(i) Technical (ReStore team): site architecture, scripting, portability, broken links, media types, potential IPR issues… </li></ul><ul><li>(ii) Academic (external reviewers): academic content, rigour, referencing, dated material… </li></ul><ul><li>(iii) Author: reflective review, cross-cutting technical and academic, esp. re. IPR </li></ul>Review process
  10. 11. <ul><li>Collaboration with resource authors </li></ul><ul><li>Funding to pay for commissioned reviews </li></ul><ul><li>ReStore team assessment of work required </li></ul><ul><li>Recommendations considered by advisory committee </li></ul>Consideration of reviews
  11. 12. <ul><li>Accept resource into ReStore, subject to package of work – by author and/or ReStore </li></ul><ul><li>Identify most appropriate deposition elsewhere </li></ul><ul><li>Resource not suitable for ReStore </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Still under active development </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Other maintenance options preferable </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Insufficient quality </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Work required exceeds resources available </li></ul></ul>Possible outcomes
  12. 13. <ul><li>IPR framework – authorship/ownership </li></ul><ul><li>Technical infrastructures </li></ul><ul><li>Sustainability – how many? how long? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Alternative outcomes </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Need guidance on future resource development for maximum sustainability </li></ul><ul><li>Need developing ESRC strategy on sustaining online resources </li></ul>Known issues
  13. 14. R e Store site overview <ul><li>Navigation, layout and sitemap </li></ul><ul><li>Web resource site navigation </li></ul><ul><li>Finding specific resource </li></ul><ul><li>Resources mock-up in ReStore repository </li></ul><ul><li>Technical resource deposition implementation </li></ul>
  14. 20. GEO-REFER resource within ReStore repository
  15. 21. PEAS resource within ReStore repository
  16. 22. PEAS>Level1 within ReStore repository
  17. 23. To be installed/configured Currently serving An overview of technical implementation involving the current hardware infrastructure and the proposed one as per future resource requirements
  18. 24. <ul><li>Developing policies, procedures and website </li></ul><ul><li>Working on initial demonstrator resources </li></ul><ul><li>Awareness-raising - Open Repositories Conference, RMF, advisory groups, today’s workshop </li></ul><ul><li>Consulting on strategic needs and directions </li></ul>What are we currently doing?
  19. 25. <ul><li>Inform delegates from relevant projects </li></ul><ul><li>Explain the purpose of the project and raise awareness of the issues </li></ul><ul><li>Identify additional resources for inclusion! </li></ul>Hopes for today’s workshop
  20. 26. Any questions please?