The document discusses best practices for implementing an open source institutional repository (IR). It recommends that organizations prepare organizationally by gaining support, defining goals, and developing policies. Technically, it recommends assessing requirements, selecting a framework, and choosing between options like DSpace and Fedora based on functional needs. The benefits of an IR for exposure, scholarship, and preservation are also highlighted.
1. Implementing an Open Source
Repository
David Gewirtz
Digital Preservation Architect
Yale University Library
Yale University AM&T
Mid-Winter ALA January 2008
2. Implementing an Open Source
Repository an Overview
A Best Practice for a Successful
Respository Implementation
Organizational Preparedness
Technical Assessment - Requirements
The Library as a service provider
The End-User as a consumer of services
A Framework for implementation
Promotion of the benefits (added value) to
end-users or your local community
Mid-Winter ALA January 2008
4. Implementing an Open Source
Repository
Organizational Preparedness for an IR
Garner Organizational Support for Project
University Provost and Librarian in higher education
Board of a public Library or local politician
Bottom up approach sometimes works best!
Define the vision, mission and goals of the IR
Service provider goals and objectives must align with
goals and objectives of consumers i.e. campus academic
communities or the community library.
Integration with the emerging cyber-infrastructure that
supports e-learning and research in high education
Make public library collections more accessible to support
distance learning for a community college.
Mid-Winter ALA January 2008
5. Implementing an Open Source
Repository
Organizational Preparedness for an IR
Develop Rules Guidelines and Policies for the IR
For submissions of scholarly communications or public
contributions - Ingest
Types of Collections, formats and metadata
Copyright IP Rights Access management
Archive/Preservation capabilities
Secure Funding for IR
Demonstrate added value to the mission and core values
of the institution or community.
Secure grants from private and public foundations such
as IMLS
Mid-Winter ALA January 2008
6. Implementing an Open Source
Repository
Technical Assessment – Service Provider View
Common Services possible with an IR
Integrate Analog and e-resource for enhanced
discovery and access to collections
Interoperability and data exchange between library
systems, collaboration and e-learning systems including
public libraries.
Expose to broaden access and impact of collections
data and metadata to external Information providers like
Google and social networking communities like Facebook
Preserve digital data that now encapsulates the human
record be the resources from publishers or community
members.
Digital curation services
Mid-Winter ALA January 2008
7. Implementing an Open Source
Repository
Technical Assessment – Consumer View
Tools for Cyber-scholarships
Serendipitous discovery of valuable resources across
academic domains/resources.
Ability to exchange import/export library and
network resources into distance learning and
collaboration systems
Ability to re-use, re-purpose and express
relationships between digital resources
A protected space for University outputs from faculty
students, staff and administration
Access and Preservation of the cultural record of a
community
Linking Services and metadata creation tools
Mid-Winter ALA January 2008
8. Implementing an Open Source
Repository
Technical Assessment:
Framework for Implementation
Express users requirements through use cases
Distill end-user functional requirements from
use case analysis and discussions with end
users
Match end-user functional requirements to
repository functionality
Mid-Winter ALA January 2008
10. Implementing an Open Source
Repository
Technical Assessment:
Framework for Implementation
Align Interface requirements to functional
requirements of the repository (add standards
and protocols)
Graph the gaps
select an open source product that best fills in
the gaps i.e. Dspace or Fedora
Mid-Winter ALA January 2008
12. Implementing an Open Source
Repository
Dspace and Fedora as Different Options
Monolithic Application with connections to
external services
An application based open a Service
Oriented Architecture of loosely coupled
network services/modules
Mid-Winter ALA January 2008
13. Implementing an Open Source
Repository
Dspace Functional Description
Library Centric
Reflects structure of the organization that
implements that application
Instantiated through communities that have
collections and items that can be aggregated
into bundles
Ingest workflow collection centric
Mid-Winter ALA January 2008
14. Implementing an Open Source
Repository
Dspace Architectural View
Mid-Winter ALA January 2008
15. Implementing an Open Source
Repository
Fedora Service Framework
Mid-Winter ALA January 2008
16. Implementing an Open Source Repository
DSpace- Fedora Architectures
Mid-Winter ALA January 2008
17. Implementing an Open Source
Repository
Promotion of the IR:
An IR can enhance the exposure of an Institution’s
intellectual treasury or brand
An IR complements Cyber-Scholarship and promotes
changes in the scholarly communication process
An IR contributes to the preservation of our cultural
memory that is now recorded in diverse digital formats.
An IR contributes to the integration of analog, digital and
network resources offered by your library.
Mid-Winter ALA January 2008
18. Implementing an Open Source
Repository
Important Repository References
Dspace: http://www.dspace.org/
Fedora: http://www.fedora.info/
Digital Commons http://www.bepress.com/ir/
E-Prints http://www.eprints.org/
Mailing List: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-
bin/webadmin?A0=jisc-repositories
Tip: Create a Google alert on the tag “Institutional
Repository” or Repository Software and let a “bot” help
you to research this subject.
Mid-Winter ALA January 2008