[Open-access] [open-science] OKF at Open Repositories 2014

[Mark MacGillivray]

On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 10:23 AM, Peter Murray-Rust <pm286 at cam.ac.uk> wrote:

>
>
>> http://orbital.blogs.lincoln.ac.uk/2012/09/06/choosing-ckan-for-research-data-management/
>>
>> Known issues include the metadata quality capability.
>>
>> Can you elucidate please? I have had my own issues but I hope they are
> part of the learning curve.
>

I can't but Joss Winn can...



>
>
>>
>> Regarding the issue of deposit into a repository, it is possible with
>> SWORD 2.0 to build such deposit functionality, and I demonstrated such a
>> "deposit" button at least two years ago at a previous OR conference.
>> However, it has never been implemented on a live repository.
>>
>> Does this mean that CKAN groks SWORD? If so this is good news.
>

Unfortunately no - repo systems like dpsace and eprints do, but not CKAN
yet. We have looked at it and it would not be hard, but it has not been
done yet, mainly because CKAN has never focussed on being an academic repo
before so has not needed to grok SWORD.


Mark








>
>
>> Of particular interest in this regard, during recent work on my phd I
>> have found that one of the reasons this functionality has never been
>> implemented at my university at least is because I am the first Edinburgh
>> academic ever to have requested such capability.
>>
>
> There is effectively no user-base for current repositories so there is no
> pressure on developers to provide them. It's a cyclic argument.
> Universities rely on G**gle (who are now teamed up with Th*ms*n - R**t*rs)
> - do you trust this combination to provide what we really want?
>
> It's shameful IMO that universities have spent (my estimate) 500 Million
> USD on repositories [*] and they are basically unsearchable without G**gle.
>
>>
>> Of course this comes down to an issue of knowing what can be done,
>> knowing how to do it, and the complex of responsibilities involved across
>> communities, and having people come to a consensus on the key requirements.
>> This is all of relevance to my phd study, and so I would ask again that if
>> any of you wish to clarify what these requirements are, that you complete
>> my scholarship survey and share it widely and encourage further feedback:
>>
>> http://ifthisistheanswer.com/survey
>>
>
> I have  answered this - please help Mark get his degree!
>
>>
>> Next year I (with Cottage Labs) intend to use my work as a basis for
>> developing and running a service to help solve this problem. Any of you
>> wishing to contribute will of course be welcome - and note that as I have
>> said before it is not actually technical capability that is the key
>> (although it is of course important), but community development, support,
>> leadership, advocacy, politics.
>>
>> Completely agreed.
>
> P.
>
> [*] 1500 research active universities (guess) * 2 FTEs (Peter Suber
> estimated 1.5-5 FTEs) * 10 years =30,000 FTEs
>
> I guess my estimate is low...
>
>
> --
> Peter Murray-Rust
> Reader in Molecular Informatics
> Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
> University of Cambridge
> CB2 1EW, UK
> +44-1223-763069
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-access/attachments/20131205/251aa464/attachment-0002.html>