ICOLC Session #1 Group-based Repositories April 23, 2007 Alan Charnes Alexia Thompson-Young.

ICOLC Session #1

Group-based RepositoriesApril 23, 2007

Alan Charnes

Alexia Thompson-Young

What Do We Mean by a Group-based Repository?

For the next hour, a group-based repository:

- Collects digital content from a group.

- Organizes the content.

- Keeps the content for a long time.

- Makes the content available to users.

Presenters

Alliance Digital Repository (Colorado Alliance of Research Libraries)

Alan Charnes

eScholarship (CDL) Ivy Anderson

Florida Digital Archive (FCLA) Michele Newberry

Presenters

Ohio Digital Research Commons (OhioLINK)

Tom Sanville

ALADIN Research Commons (WRLC)

Lizanne Payne

Texas Digital Library (TDL)

Alexia Thompson-Young

Agenda

Best effort list of group-based repositories.

About 7 minutes for each presenter, including Q&A.

Presenters to discuss project goals, timetable, platform (software), content, staffing, funding, current status and target audience.

Additional Q&A at the end.

ADR

Alan CharnesExecutive Director

Colorado Alliance of Research Libraries

ICOLCApril 23, 2007

Alliance Digital Repository

7

ADR Goals

As a centralized electronic storehouse for unique and valuable digital content created, collected and deposited by multiple libraries,departments, institutions, agencies and creators….

The ADR strives to…..

8

ADR Goals

Heighten awareness of the value of digital resources to the research, information and educational missions of the eleven Colorado Alliance libraries

Provide access from anywhere to the consortium’s digital collections

Develop a flexible platform able to support any kind of digital asset

Preserve the digital assets

9

What Digital Assets?Images

Texts

Maps/Plats

Audio

Video

Datasets

Faculty Publications

Learning Objects

Electronic Theses and Dissertations

Institutional Records Bulletins, Directories and publications

Current and Historical Campus Newspapers

Whatever!

10

Not Just An Institutional Repository

The ADR is a robust digital repository because of the wide range of content, variety of content providers and mix of institutions (e.g. University of Colorado, Colorado School of Mines, Colorado College and Denver Public Library).

11

ADR History/TimelineMay 2006. Selected Fedora platform after nearly two years of product review by Alliance committees.

October 2006. $445,000 start-up funding approved by Alliance Board.

November 2006. ADR Project launched.

December 2006. Hired 2.0 FTE, committed Colorado Alliance staff and resources.

12

More ADR History/Timeline

January 2007. Hardware installed, ADR Alpha environment configured.

March 2007. Alpha version launched using library-provided sample content (100 digital objects in multiple formats) e.g. electronic texts, images, sound files.

June 2007. Beta release target (1,000 digital objects). Currently engaged in joint R&D effort with NSDL ($22,500 in federal grant support).

13

ADR Timeline

June 2007. Accelerate marketing campaign and development of training resources. Convene All Alliance Conference (grand introduction: audience of 100 senior librarians in the consortium).

September 2007. ETD workflows go live for library staff (ADR grows to 10,000 digital objects).

14

ADR Timeline

December 2007. Production Version 1.0 –Ingest, management and discovery tools in place, plus extensive support features including limited eCommerce capability. (120,000 digital objects).

June 2008. Version 2.0 –now adding non-text content, websites, audio, video (150,000 digital objects).

July 2008. Start-up phase completed.

15

July 2008 and Beyond

ADR installed as ongoing Colorado Alliance service with consortial members providing continuing funding via annual assessments.

Continued pursuit of grant funding for digitization and application initiatives with current and new co-development partners.

ADR broadened to include participation with other consortia.

16

ADR Highlights

Supports multiple formats and content types using open source software and tools.

Provides levels of access to a variety of audiences.

Is centrally managed and operated in a consortial environment. Has an aggressive development and production timeline.

Includes a mix of academic and public libraries in two states.

17

Final Thoughts

More Information?

Visit http://adr.coalliance.org

Contact ADR Staff at [email protected]

Talk about partnering with ADR?

Email me at [email protected]

http://adr.coalliance.org/

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

The Florida Digital Archive

Michele NewberryFlorida Center for Library Automation

ICOLC Spring 2007

ICOLC Spring 2007

Florida Digital Archive

ICOLC Spring 2007


State Universities

FCLA

ICOLC Spring 2007


•Locally written repository software (DAITSS)•Preservation repository functions only•Designed as a “dark archive”•Based on OAIS functional architecture•Implements format migration & normalization

ICOLC Spring 2007


AvailabilityCaptureSelection

IdentityDescription

Understandability Documentation

AuthenticityAuthentication

FixitySecureStorage

ViabilityMediaManagement

RenderabilityFormatStrategies

ICOLC Spring 2007


AvailabilityCaptureSelection

IdentityDescription

Understandability Documentation

AuthenticityAuthentication

FixitySecureStorage

ViabilityMediaManagement

RenderabilityFormatStrategies

DAITSS

ICOLC Spring 2007


Format treatment

Libraries can archive any content, but only supported formats get full preservation

Formats are analyzed then treatment is coded into DAITSS

For supported formats, files are normalized, localized and/or migrated on at time of Ingest and Dissemination

AIFF 1.3 AIFF-C 1.0 JFIF 1.02 PDF 1.2 – 1.6 Plain text TIFF 5.0, 6.0 WAVE XML 1.0 XML DTD 1.0 JPEG2000 AVI

• MPEG, pcm QuickTime

ICOLC Spring 2007


Stats and status

Timing in production since November 2005 distributable version of DAITSS since Feb 2007Content mostly ETDs and masters from digitized collections 26,750 “titles”, 206,220 files, 3.7 TB (1 copy)Staffing & funding 4 FTE programmers, 1 FTE operations + oversight funded from FCLA operating budget possibility of cost recovery charging in future

ICOLC Spring 2007


For more information

http://www.fcla.edu/digitalArchive/

Priscilla Caplan ([email protected])

http://www.fcla.edu/digitalArchive/

OhioLINK

Digital Resource Commons (DRC)

Cooperating Across Libraries and Institutions

The OhioLINK (DRC) is…• Second Generation to the Digital Media

Center (DMC)

• Single repository that supports storage, distribution, publication, and long-term preservation of all formats of

• the educational and research materials of participating institutions and their people

• for commercial and non-commercial content

• envisioned as a multi-type state vehicle

The DRC can include• Faculty research papers such as pre-prints,

post-prints or working papers

• Open Access Self-Archiving and Publishing

• Student theses and dissertations

• Course Materials and learning objects

• Library, archival, and special collections

• Instructional video, audio, and images

• Virtual Reality, simulations, etc…

Digital Resource Commons Context

DRC

Common Search Interface

Repository

Contributors

Users

EJC E-Books ETDBranded

DRC

Servers, TFN, Grid, Directory/ Authentication, DBMS, Search Engines,

Asset Management Systems, etc

Documents/Objects of all types:Video, Audio, Images, DatasetsReference Books, Encyclopedias Indexes, CitationsTheses, Dissertations Course Modules and Materials Simulations, Tutorials, PresentationsCurriculum MaterialsProfessional Development ResourcesETC.

Institutional RepositoriesDigital Resource CommonsElectronic Journal Center OLN, OSC, OhioLINK, school, and library web sitesOLN, OhioLINK and library catalogsCMS and Hosted CMSOhio Resource Center/Eisenhower NCInstructor course web sitesMy learning Space24x7 Help, Training ServicesETC.

Interoperable Digital Library & Learning Object Repositories

K-12 TeachersK-12 StudentsHigher Ed FacultyHigher Ed StudentsPublic library users and general pop.

USERS

Services and Support

Infrastructure

Conceptual Context for Ohio Commons for Digital Education Initiatives

DRC

The DRC will support…• each institution/community sets its own content

policies • self-activated/controlled content ingestion

workflows• institutional ‘brand’ and customized interface for its

content• a collective OhioLINK level branding and collection• local control, multi-tiered security levels will allow

content to be shared only to the extent desired. • the Institutions. Communities or Contributors will

specify layers of access starting with individual, class, Communities, campus, Institution, OhioLINK community, Ohio, or world-wide access

DRC Technology• Fedora is underlying unified repository

• Presentation/interface layers and ingest functions built by staff (mostly Java based)

• Underlying Application “silos” will vary– Lucene for indexing all silos– DLXS Image Class for multimedia– XTF for e-books

• 5 FTE plus parts of others at various stages

DRC Implementation• DMC multimedia to DRC DLXS platform – done• EBC to DRC XTF platform in July 07• EJC to DRC Lucene/presentation layer - done • EJC content to Fedora – fall 07• Institutionally branded DRC all formats – June 07• OL branded/multi-inst searching – Sep 07• Improved ingest and authorization levels – Dec 07• Integrated front ends and back rooms with other

OhioLINK/OLN services – to follow - continuous• Improved, single sign-on …Shibboleth – now

operational

ALADIN Research Commons

A Shared Institutional Repository at the Washington Research Library Consortium

Lizanne PayneExecutive Director, WRLC

ICOLC April 23, 2007

WRLC’sALADINResearch Commons

ICOLCApril 2007

SharedInstitutionalRepositories

Washington Research Library Consortium

Participant Agreement

Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws

Board of Directors

WRLC 501 (c)(3) corporation

UniversityOf D.C.

Marymount

Georgetown

GeorgeWashington

GeorgeMason

Gallaudet

Catholic

American

WRLC


ICOLCApril 2007


WRLC’s ALADIN Digital Library System

Online Catalog & Library Operations

ALADIN Digital Library Portal

Digital CollectionsResearch Commons

Campus resources

External resources

23+ collections so farPhotos, audio, manuscripts

Over 7 million volumes,1.3 million circulations annually, 216,000 consortial loans

Online databases and E-Journals


ICOLCApril 2007


IR Project Goals

• Showcase each university’s scholarly output through ALADIN

• Facilitate federated searching of local scholarly materials to encourage collaboration

• Leverage shared IT resources to provide new services sponsored by libraries


ICOLCApril 2007


Staffing and Funding

• “Leverage” = no explicit funding

• WRLC maintains IT staff and operating capital to support new projects

• WRLC staff = estimated .5 FTE programmer + .5 FTE systems librarian/Web designer

• Member library staff = task force to coordinate initial development


ICOLCApril 2007


IR Project Status

2005 20072006

DSpace implementation

WRLC staff

DSpace Working Group

Policies and Operational Guidelines

Library staff Pilot projects

Going live?

2004


ICOLCApril 2007


Sample Pilot Projects

• American University– School of Communications Graduate Student

Portfolios

• George Washington University– Battleground Polling Data– Electronic theses and dissertations

• Georgetown University– GU Press Languages & Linguistics Archive– Digital Storytelling & Multimedia Narratives


ICOLCApril 2007


Challenges of a shared IR

• How to preserve institutional identity within a shared IR

• How to navigate legal and organizational complexity– Relationship of IR participant (faculty,

community) to individual institution and WRLC – Defining WRLC responsibilities and rights and

those of individual institutions

• How – or IF – to define common standards for acceptable content


ICOLCApril 2007



ICOLCApril 2007


Next steps

• Institutional buy-in and commitment of staff resources

• Marketing

• Copyright education & awareness

• Content, content, content

California Digital Library

CDL eScholarship:Past, Present, Future

Ivy Anderson


ICOLC Spring 2007

Montreal


About the University of California

• Ten campuses – 9 Carnegie Research Intensive

– 1 Medical School-Only campus (5 medical schools in all)

– 209,000 students

– 170,000 faculty and staff

• California Digital Library– “11th University Library” – founded 1997

– Reports to UC Office of the President

– Allied with Office of Scholarly Communication and Systemwide Library Planning


About the CDL• Two Complementary Roles

– Facilitate systemwide library collaboration (e.g. shared collection development)– Distinctive services emphasizing stewardship, innovation in scholarly publishing, and

open-access digital collections

• Three Audiences– UC libraries– Broader UC community– External constituencies and the general public

• Five Programs– Collection Development and Management (Licensed, Print, Built Content)– Bibliographic Services (Melvyl Catalog, SFX, ERM)– Preservation (Digital Preservation Repository, Web Archiving)– Digital Special Collections (Calisphere, Online Archive of California, Counting

California)– Publishing Services (eScholarship Repository, eScholarship Editions, collaboration

with UC Press)


eScholarship: Background and Evolution

• Began in 2000 as an initiative of the CDL; later helped launch Office of Scholarly Communication– Provide low-cost alternative publishing services for the UC

community

– Support widespread distribution of the materials that result from research & teaching

– Foster new models of scholarly publishing through development and application of advanced technologies

• Now CDL Publishing Services (July 2006)– Increasing collaboration with University of California Press and

other UC-wide digital stewardship initiatives


Current eScholarship Services• eScholarship Repository

– launched 2003– 200 UC depts. contributing more than 15,000 papers, books,

articles, etc.– 5 million full-text downloads a/o April 2007– Technology: bepress (outsourced solution)

• eScholarship Editions– 2,000 XML Scholarly monographs from University of California

Press– CDL-UC Press partnership extends to monographic series, digital

critical editions, interactive Web based publications– Technology: eXtensible Text Framework (XTF)

http://www.cdlib.org/inside/projects/xtf/

http://www.cdlib.org/inside/projects/xtf/


Budget, Staffing, Infrastructure• Budget: $970K (includes all projects, not just eScholarship)

• Staff: – Catherine Candee, Director – Manager, Publishing Services– eScholarship Analyst (unfilled)– Faculty Outreach Coordinator (unfilled)– 3 technical staff (Tech Lead + text system designer + publishing

services architect)

• Platforms– eScholarship Repository: bepress (outsourced)– eScholarship Editions: eXtensible Text Framework (XTF)


Unified Publishing Services• Dissemination & Repository Services

– Working papers, technical reports, etc.– Postprint Repository– Electronic Theses & Dissertations

• Traditional Scholarly Publishing Services – Scholarly monographs– Peer-reviewed journals

• New Publishing Models– Distributed Editorial Boards– Digital Critical Editions– Interactive map-based publications in soc sciences & humanities– Science reference/collaboration with museums


Goals of UC Publishing– Align UC publishing services with the academic

enterprise of the University of California

– Broaden the role of the university press beyond gatekeeper for a select few; reclaim and extend the original role of the university press

– Coordinate planning across the UC system, find intersections in IT planning, digital stewardship, research data support, publishing and preservation

– Develop publishing services to be interoperable with services for research and supplementary data


Next Steps 2007-2008• Extend repository-based services to support the implementation of UC

policy on faculty copyright

• Formalize a collaboratory structure for UC Press and CDL’s eScholarship Office to focus efforts in strategic publishing initiatives

• Provide a more robust journal publication service: offer a menu of choices for editorial assistance, production quality, print and access options

• Implement cost-recovery mechanisms; secure open access options

• Seek efficiencies across traditional publishing modalities, e.g., books and journals; invest savings in R&D for emerging publishing modalities


Guiding Principles• To remain competitive the university must provide a research

infrastructure for its faculty that will ensure productivity and stimulate innovation in all aspects of the research, teaching and learning cycle

• Publishing must be conceived more broadly than the production of an archival record; it is an integral part of the research enterprise

• Publishing must embrace a suite of production and dissemination activities, some of which will be revenue generating

• Publishing must enable faculty to create and distribute works via the most appropriate means

April 23, 2007 ICOLC - Montreal 60

A digital infrastructure for the scholarly activities of Texas universities

Partners

• Collaboration of higher education institutions in Texas– 4 Texas ARL libraries: UT, A&M, TTU, and UH– New Associate Member libraries:

• University of North Texas• University of Texas at Dallas• University of Texas at Arlington• Texas State University• Baylor University

– New Affiliate Member libraries:• University of Texas at Brownsville• MD Anderson• Angelo State University• A&M Galveston

• Future Goal– All of higher education in Texas

Goal

Become a center of excellence for the curation and preservation of digital scholarly information

in the state of Texas

http://www.tdl.org

The TDL Budget

• Funds the TDL infrastructure - core technology, core team• Does not fund the actual work of putting up the Institutional

Repository, website, and ETDs • Partners provide cash

– For personnel costs– For shared computing infrastructure

• Partners provide staff– For working groups– For bridge groups– For managing their local repositories

April 23, 2007 ICOLC - Montreal 66

TDL Co-DirectorsMark McFarland

John Leggett

Scott PhillipsResearch & Programming

Coordinator

Philip MattinglyTechnical Coordinator

TDL Working GroupsWeb Oversight, ETD,

Repositories, Metadata, Computing Infrastructure

Bridge GroupsJay Paz

Programmer

TDL Programming Teams

TDL ProgrammerUT Austin/FTE

TDLGoverning

Board

Hillary SpillerAdministrative

Associate

Project ManagerHiring in Process

TDL Management

5 Year Plan

• Year 1: Start-Up, FY2006• Year 2: Plan, FY 2007• Year 3: Demonstrate, FY2008• Year 4: Deploy, FY2009• Year 5: Assess, FY2010

Year 2: Plan2006-2007Plan infrastructure and develop policies for content submission and management

• Manakin DSpace• General Repository Policies• Common Submission System for ETDs• Computing Infrastructure• Preservation Network• Access Control

– Shibboleth

Questions?

Contact me, Alexia Thompson-Young

[email protected]

ICOLC Session #1 Group-based Repositories April 23, 2007 Alan Charnes Alexia Thompson-Young.

Documents

Transcript of ICOLC Session #1 Group-based Repositories April 23, 2007 Alan Charnes Alexia Thompson-Young.