2008/06/20: Digital Curation Blog: Do we really want repositories to be more Web2.0-like?
Chris Rusbridge asks Digital Curation Blog: Do we really want repositories to be more Web2.0-like?. Can we be more specific about what we mean by that?Yes. My ideas are kind of vague at this point, mostly because I don't have the tech expertise to know precisely what's do-able. Ultimately I'd like to see institutional repositories act as a "master bibliography" of all scholarly communication produced at the university. Services I envision:
1) FOAFish graphical representation of academic genealogies, i.e. who supervised who's dissertation, who's so and so's advisor's advisor (i.e. academic grandfather). A way to see relationships between various dissertations
2) Microformat citations for export/manipulation within a bibliographic citation management system -- leading to service whereby automated lists of papers for easy inclusion into web pages/CVs or other interfaces. This would also be good for automating cited reference reports, especially if we could integrate it with things like Web of Science, Google Scholar or Scopus (pipe dream there, as if commercial interests will allow us to access proprietary stuff, but hey! I can wish, can't I?).
3) Author identifier services to provide (a) authority control for name variations, (b) unique identifier for integrating with tools like OCLC's Worldcat Identities project (love the graphic views of an author's publication time line. wouldn't tenure review committees get good use out of that?)
4) Integration with annotation/comment tools. Ability to create feeds built on those comments
5) Authoring tools with version control for better co-authoring/collaboration. Getting people to add things to the repository earlier in their work flow.
6) Microformat tags/keywords for interoperability with other tag spaces/social bookmarking
7) Chemical compound mark-up
8) Geotagging/geo-referencing mark-up - linking resources to related maps
And that's just off the top of my head. Honestly, what repository managers really need to do is talk to their customers. The services we develop have to be grounded in the needs of the people we serve. What challenges do they face when managing their scholarly output? Can we make their lives easier/better? Otherwise we will be irrelevant.
Labels: open scholarship, repositories, scholarly communication, semantic web
posted by Laura @ 3:04 PM
0 Comments
Links to this post
