Output – Lirolem Completion Report: institutional impact

Title: LIROLEM Completion Report

Section:

Page: 2

Summary of contents:
‘Yes, there is definitely an interest and positive attitude towards depositing in the repository. For example The Snr. PVC has established a repository Steering Group chaired by the Dean of Research, to direct the strategic development of the repository and to oversee the implementation of an Institutional open access mandate and to approve the necessary policy and business changes that will ensure that all research undertaken by University of Lincoln students and staff should be systematically deposited, routinely managed, preserved and made freely available. We recognize that this will be a slow process that needs to first occur at the Departmental level.’

‘Although there are only approx. 100 IR records visible by the public, the 900+ records that we created for our RAE submission are in the ‘review’ area of the repository and will be made public in the near future, following discussions with each department’

Comments:
Records a strategic decision by institution to engage with Open Access and address the idea of a mandate.

Also notes metadata / content available in a new repository as a a result of this project.

Date Released: unknown, March April 2008 likely

URI for Output: http://learninglab.lincoln.ac.uk/wiki/images/c/ca/Completion_Report.pdf

Output – Lirolem – Completion Report: software and tools

Title: LIROLEM Completion Report

Section:

Page: 1 and 3

Summary of contents:
‘We installed e-prints and although we have not been able to develop a seamless interaction with Blackboard as we originally intended we have developed a wiki space in Blackboard for students to collaborate on the production of materials for deposit in the repository. This is an area which we feel needs much more community effort and focus. We are aware of the SWORD Project but as most HE institutions have VLEs and IRs, there needs to be greater effort spent on integrating the two.’p1

‘We have integrated social bookmarking into the IR, using ‘Add This’.’p3

Comments:
Lirolem highlights the ongoing disjunction between VLE’s and repositories and that their integration has not adequately been addressed.

However, their integration with bookmarking tools is a good example of joining up formal and informal services and supporting users in integrating information from repositories into other tools and making it more visible

Date Released: unknown, March April 2008 likely

URI for Output: http://learninglab.lincoln.ac.uk/wiki/images/c/ca/Completion_Report.pdf

Output – Lirolem – SUM: service arrangement

Title: LIROLEM – Service Usage Model

Section: Structure & Arrangement

Page: 6

Summary of contents:

(section reproduced)

Services: Security, user management, submission, object store, metadata management, search, transcoding, rights management, dissemination and reporting.

Data Sources: User profile information; data object & object representation information (SIP); provenance, context, reference and fixity information (AIP); METS, IMS Packages, IEEE LOM, PBCore, Dublin Core/OAI-PMH (DIP). For SIP, AIP & DIP, see OAIS Reference Model.

Co-ordination:

  • The Security service authenticates and authorises the user to use the upload, metadata management, search, transcode and download services.
  • The User Management service creates, modifies and removes users and their permissions.
  • The Submission service permits the ingest of data objects and and object representation information (SIP) to the repository.
  • The Object Store service tracks data objects being submitted and disseminated from the repository.
  • The Metadata Management service, creates, modifies, verifies and removes all content metadata (descriptive, administrative and technical) in the repository, as well as private user metadata (notes, bookmarks) and shared user metadata (tags, comments). Metadata is linked to objects (items, sets, resources), Licences and users. Provenance, context, reference and fixity information (AIP) is comnpleted for the data object and validated.
  • The Search service allows a user to search data managed by the metadata management service, according to permissions granted by the user management service. The search service returns and displays search results drawing from the object store service and metadata management service.
  • The Transcoding service converts data objects from the source format to another format. This occurs at submission time to create preview thumbnails of images and clips of video and audio and also as requested by the user prior to dissemination. Transcoding is performed according to rights applied to the data object.
  • The Rights Management service requires the application of terms and conditions (a ‘Licence’) to the data object.
  • The Dissemination service permits the download of transcoded data objects and selected metadata (DIP) according to the Licence applied to the data object.
  • The Reporting service permits the audit and reporting of transactions by each of the above services.”
  • Comments:

    this section presents the key service arrangement part of the SUM. this outlines the arrangement of software services and standards LIROLEM used to support the management and use of multimedia resources. As such it provides a point of reference for other software development and delineates what standards the development/ implementation used.

    it would have been helpful if the SUM had explicitly linked standards with specific service arrangements – however the connections will, in general, be deducible.

    Date Released: 2007 -11- 07 (Note: although this SUM is complete it is currently still on the eFramework development wiki – it may move)

    URI for Output: https://e-framework.usq.edu.au/users/wiki/DevelopmentSUMLiroLem

    Output – Lirolem – SUM

    Title: LIROLEM Service Usage Model

    Summary of contents:

    “The Lirolem/Virtual Studio is a means of digitally managing and preserving the output of students and staff at the University of Lincoln, irrespective of the format in which they are produced. Initially, the repository will concentrate on teaching and learning outputs within the School of Architecture, but it is intended that the repository will also manage research and teaching and learning outputs from all University departments. The repository will permit members of the University community to deposit, describe, search for, interact with and extract material that they deem valuable for use in their research, teaching and learning. This SUM describes the specific business processes involved in the operation of the repository and the services it provides. ”

    The SUM contains a business process model of LIROLEM; a SUM diagram of it, lists of eF service types used by LIROLEM their arrangement, design trade offs, and relevant standards.

    Comments:

    although excerpts from this SUM will create or be part of other outputs.  I consider a reference to the SUM as a entity to provide the most appropriate direct evidence of support for the eFramework.

    Page numbers: all

    Date Released: 2007 -11- 07 (Note: although this SUM is complete it is currently still on the eFramework development wiki – it may move)

    URI for Output: https://e-framework.usq.edu.au/users/wiki/DevelopmentSUMLiroLem

    Output – SOURCE – Bulk Migration Tool and Service

    Title: Bulk Migration Tool and Service

    Date Released: Unknown

    URI for Output: http://www.source.bbk.ac.uk/code/

    Summary of contents: A bulk migration tool that can plug into the common repository plugs of two or more repositories and migrate content interchangeably from one repository to another.

    Additonal information: The current version is a java Alpha build available as a zip file from http://www.source.bbk.ac.uk/code/BulkMigrationDemonstrator_ProofOfConcept_AlphaBuild. It require a username and password to download with no information on how to get this.

    Project – The Depot

    Project Name: The Depot

    Programme Name: Repositories and Preservation Programme

    Strand: Information Environment

    JISC Project URI: http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/programmes/reppres/depot

    Project URI: http://depot.edina.ac.uk/

    Start Date: 1st August 2006

    End Date: 31st March 2009

    Governance: RPAG

    Contact Name and Role: Bill Hubbard, Project Manager

    Brief project description:

    “The Depot is a JISC support service, launched in June 2007 with the specific task of ensuring that all in the UK research community can benefit from making their published papers available under Open Access, and helping maximise readership of their work. The Depot is OAI-compliant, allowing deposited e-prints to be ‘harvested’ by search engines across the world.”

    The Depot offers two services:

    1. a re-direct service, with the Depot acting as a gateway, especially to repositories at UK universities (institutional repositories)
    2. a deposit service for e-prints, with the Depot acting as a national repository for researchers not yet having an institutional repository in which to deposit their papers, articles, and book chapters (e-prints).

    Outputs:

    Project – SNEEP

    Project Name: Social Networking Extensions for Eprints (SNEEP)

    Programme Name: Repositories and Preservation

    Strand: Information Environment, e-Resources, e-Learning

    JISC Project URI: http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/programmes/reppres/sue/sneep.aspx

    Project URI: http://sneep.ulcc.ac.uk/wiki

    Start Date: 1st September 2007

    End Date: 28th February 2008

    Governance: RPAG

    Contact Name and Role: Richard Davis, Project Manager

    Brief project description:”SNEEP is a 6 month “rapid development” project to develop extensions adding further key Web 2.0 features to Eprints, and demonstrate their use in an Institutional Repository. This is in part a response to the recent recommendation by Franklin and van Harmeln that projects be undertaken to investigate how institutional repositories can be made more accessible for learning and teaching through the use of Web 2.0 technologies. The project will develop and demonstrate fully working models of web software to incorporate these functions into Eprints, and report on its outcomes and findings. The output will be made openly available for reuse and further development by the community.”

    Outputs: