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.

Next generation repositories


Published on

Invited presentation given to open access event in Izmir, October 2017, as part of "open-access week"

Published in: Internet
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Next generation repositories

  1. 1. Paul Walk Director, Antleaf Managing Director, Dublin Core Metadata Initiative (DCMI) Web: Email: Twitter: @paulwalk Next Generation Institutional Repositories
  2. 2. 3 cheers for the current generation of repositories!
  3. 3. cheer #1: proven technology, ubiquitous in our institutions
  4. 4. cheer #2: strong community support
  5. 5. cheer #3: distributed policy control
  6. 6. about the COAR Next Generation Repositories Working Group
  7. 7. Next Generation Repositories Working Group • Eloy Rodrigues, chair (COAR, Portugal) • Andrea Bollini (CINECA, Italy) • Alberto Cabezas (LA Referencia, Chile) • Donatella Castelli (OpenAIRE/CNR, Italy) • Les Carr (Southampton University, UK) • Leslie Chan (University of Toronto at Scarborough, Canada) • Rick Johnson (SHARE/University of Notre Dame, US) • Petr Knoth (Jisc and Open University, UK) • Paolo Manghi (CNR, Italy) • Lazarus Matizirofa (NRF, South Africa) • Pandelis Perakakis (Open Scholar, Spain) • Oya Rieger (Cornell University, US) • Jochen Schirrwagen (University of Bielefeld, Germany) • Daisy Selematsela (NRF, South Africa) • Kathleen Shearer (COAR, Canada) • Tim Smith (CERN, Switzerland) • Herbert Van de Sompel (Los Alamos National Laboratory, US) • Paul Walk (Antleaf, UK) • David Wilcox (Duraspace/Fedora, Canada) • ▪ Kazu Yamaji (National Institute of Informatics, Japan)
  8. 8. To position repositories as the foundation for a distributed, globally networked infrastructure for scholarly communication…
  9. 9. objectives • cross-repository interoperability • encourage the emergence of added-value services • transform the scholarly communication system by emphasising: • collective, open and distributed management of open content • collective innovation
  10. 10. principles • distribution of control of scholarly resources • inclusiveness: different institutions and regions have particular needs (e.g diverse language, policies and priorities) and this must be supported • for the public good • intelligent openness
  11. 11. Intended outputs • direct outputs: • the Next Generation Working Group will collectively produce: • reports • conceptual models • recommendations for particular technologies • indirect outputs: • some individuals independently of the Next Generation Working Group will: • implement software changes to repository platforms • build infrastructure (micro-services)
  12. 12. design assumptions • focus on resources • not just associated metadata - treat them equally • pragmatism • favour the simpler approach • evolution, not revolution • use existing software and systems where possible • convention over configuration • standardise only where necessary and minimise constraints • engage with users where they are: • integrate into environments and systems where users are already engaged Not all users are human, some are machines!
  13. 13. repository ‘behaviours’ and user-stories
  14. 14. “behaviours” • Supporting discovery of content • exposing identifiers and links between resources • supporting navigation • supporting batch discovery • actively sharing or exposing notifications • Participating in the social network • Global identification of people in the repository network • Annotation, commenting and reviews - e.g. Open Peer Review • Logging and exposing of user interaction data across repositories • Preservation • Supporting other processes • Declaring licenses at a resource level • Exposing standardised usage metrics • Content transfer (e.g. for text and data mining)
  15. 15. user stories as <some actor>, I want to <do something>, in order to gain <some benefit>
  16. 16. user stories relating to repository ‘behaviours’ Example user-stories for the behaviour “Discovery through navigation”: • as a human or machine user, I want to easily and uniformly identify the metadata in a repository record, so that I can ascertain the relevance of the resource. • as a repository manager, I want to be able to access the metadata in my repository in real time through an API in order to build views or services on any platform using the data. • as a research manager (funder or institution), I want to be able to track the research outputs related to a specific funded project to demonstrate value and compliance with policy
  17. 17. characteristics of the next generation repository
  18. 18. repositories must be deeply connected • outgoing: • individual content resources • directly accessible on the network • individual metadata records • not just in batches • individual users • as part of a variety of professional and social networks • incoming: • using all appropriate global identifier systems • accepting automated deposit of content and data from other systems (e.g. scientific instruments) • allowing external services to interact with content • content mining • annotation services • etc.
  19. 19. repositories need to be active • the next generation repository needs to talk to the world • publishing events to notification hubs and notifying users • and to listen, and respond: • respond to requests for content and metadata, equally • continuously improve the information it has, adding value where it can by: • responding to and supporting annotation and peer review • not just allowing text/data-mining, but supporting it and benefitting from the derived information supporting user workflows - providing and accepting data
  20. 20. active repositories • repositories could become pro-active components in an event-driven scholarly system • publishing ‘events’ such as the addition of a new item to one or more notification hubs • third-party systems ‘subscribing’ to these notifications - many potential applications • would involve very little or no effort by repository administrators • modest software development
  21. 21. being of, not just on, the Web • obvious…but not really done yet • the ‘splash page’ requiring human mediation is a real problem • “signposting the scholarly web” • link HTTP headers • would involve very little or no effort by repository administrators • a small amount of software development in repository systems
  22. 22. content, metadata and people Diagram by Herbert Van de Sompel
  23. 23. conclusion • the goal: • To position repositories as the foundation for a distributed, globally networked infrastructure for scholarly communication… • we already have much of what is needed: • ubiquitous distribution of open repository platforms • the desire to challenge the status quo to work in the square (meydan), not the tower (kule) together, we can establish a scholarly communications infrastructure that we can be proud of, and that our children will thank us for!
  24. 24. Paul Walk Director, Antleaf Managing Director, Dublin Core Metadata Initiative (DCMI) Web: Email: Twitter: @paulwalk Teşekkürler! More information: