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

Thu Dec 5 11:31:32 UTC 2013

On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 11:30 AM, Mike Taylor <mike at indexdata.com> wrote:

> SWORD is a technically superior solution, because it's a single
> protocol that can be implemented by multiple clients and multiple
> servers in an interoperable way. A client developed to use any given
> repo's own API will be be re-usable elsewhere.
>

Also true.

Mark

>
> -- Mike.
>
>
>
> On 5 December 2013 11:28, Peter Murray-Rust <pm286 at cam.ac.uk> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Mark MacGillivray <mark at cottagelabs.com
> >
> > wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> 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.
> >>
> >
> > CKAN has its  own API so if there is a Java client I'll use that - I
> don't
> > think SWORD gives a technical advantage - it might give a political one.
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Peter Murray-Rust
> > Reader in Molecular Informatics
> > Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
> > University of Cambridge
> > CB2 1EW, UK
> > +44-1223-763069
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > open-access mailing list
> > open-access at lists.okfn.org
> > http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-access
> > Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-access
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-access/attachments/20131205/dd630c51/attachment-0002.html>