Informal report on repository evaluationD. H. Wood – Streamline (DRAFT)

10/01/2008

IntroductionThis report examines six web based repositories, for the purpose of identifying their strengths and weaknesses. This feeds into the Streamline project by providing benchmarks on the current state of repository development. The project aims to investigate the three primary purposes of repositories functionality: Metadata creation in the packaging of resources; Resource discovery; Personal management and sharing of resources. Alongside this other requirements have been identified through discussion with various users or intended users. The aim of this report is to give those members of the Streamline project who were unable to attend all the presentations an over view of each repositories major features and functions. Some of the criteria were not covered by the presenters, may have been missed by the note taker or not featured on the companies’ web sites. If there is missing information or incorrect information please add your comments via MS Words track changes and return.From this the following criteria were developed and applied to the repositories:

1. Metadata – how is metadata entered, how much is automated, how adaptable is the system to organisational requirements?

2. Standards – What standards does the application conform to? Such as metadata, SCORM, LOM or web based such as W3C?

3. Versioning –Does the CMS provide a facility for linking and tracking content versions?

4. Resource discovery – Are search and browse facilities provide? How are these organised? What methods are used to facilitate search e.g. algorithms, AI, weightings and context? Can users and administrators customise these facilities? Are metadata used to describe content?

5. Personal space – Do individuals or groups have control over personal space for the storage and restriction of files?

6. Publication control – Can publication release date be set on content or collections?

7. Content linking – Can content be linked with any other piece of content both internal and external to the repository.

8. Interface and help – Are the interfaces comprehensible? Is there sufficient user and develop documentation or support?

9. Access – Can restricted access be set on individual items and collections, for individuals, groups and the public access? What authentication process is used?

10.File storage – How are the files and metadata stored? Are there any limitations on file type, size or quantity?

11.Client side linking – Is it possible to link the repository directly to client side applications for automatic uploading and editing of content?

12.Extendibility – Are there any plugins available to extend the functionality of the application? Is it possible to develop plugins for the application? Are their any inbuilt special features that extend the repository belong digital storage?

13.Future developments – Is there currently or planned support for web services, ajax, and semantic technologies?

The following sections discuss each of the repository features in the context of the above criteria. They are presented in the order of the presentations given. Presenter details and web resources are given in the introduction to each repository.

Digital Commons - audio conferencePresented by Robin Beecroft on Thursday 10th January, 4-6pm in JGG17Digital commons has been developed for the storage and presentation of scholarly materials. Purchased together with the hosting the developers provide all the support, training and management required for it’s administration. The web interface can be designed to organisational branding requirements. There is no limit on the number of users, administrates or file space used. Quarterly updates ensure that the product is keeping abreast of technology advances and free from bugs.

Figure 1 Digital Commons: Demo site home page The sites upper structure is based on community containers. This can represent faculties, research groups, collections etcetera. There is no limit to the number of containers or sub containers. Each can be designed with their own branding/web interface design. The lower layer, referred to as a series, contains groups of content with specific relationships, such as publisher.Figure 1 shows the demo sites front page. Basic search and browse are available on all pages. The user’s options, linked to their access status are also available on the right. The body of the page can be used to display featured articles, top 10 lists and various content counts. The bottom navigation provides access to organisational information, FAQ, site polices and the user account. Figure 2 shows an individual piece of contents details. This gives the usual title, authors, abstract, classifications as well as a citation format. Depending on the content and users restrictions download, forwarding and

printing are available at this point. The site has also embed the addthis.com function that enables a quick link to your favourite social bookmarking or sharing site. This is not exclusive to this system and can be embed on any web page. Adding a document is a fairly straight forward single page form for the author. Various metadata details are added at this point, some of which are automatically populated from known information. Multiple authors can be attached to a single document. Supplementary information can also be added, with links to other files such as previous versions. There is also the option of transferring MS Word doc, WordPerfect and RTF (Rich Text Format) files into pdf versions. Various licensing restrictions can also be linked to content at this point. Administrators are able to make the metadata fields optional or remove completely. A monitoring workflow can also be set up for document and metadata checking prior to publication into the repository. Copyright and usage restrictions can be linked to.

Figure 2 Digital Commons: Content description pageA demo site is available at: http://demo.ir.bepress.com/ Further details can be found at: http://www.bepress.com/ir/ Several articles have been published about the use and benefits of digital commons available here: http://works.bepress.com/ir_research/

MetadataAs noted above metadata is entered by the author at the content submission stage. There is also the option for administrators to check the

content and metadata prior to publication. Auto-generation of some of the metadata is also available. Title, description, author/s are examples of some of the metadata, but the other fields available were not presented. It is assumed that one of the fields was keywords and/or the ability to classify the document within the systems taxonomy. Document type details, date and copyright are assumed to be present from other topics of the discussion.

StandardsNo specific metadata standard was mentioned during the presentation. The promotional material states that 10 DTD standards are supported including Dublin Core, but does not elaborate. However the system does compile with W3C accessibility guidelines.

VersioningThere is no built in versioning process. The presenter suggested this was best achieved by using the file linking system to refer to previous or related content. This is done at the point of content submission. The links are then displayed at the end of individual content pages.

Resource discoveryBrowse is available in three formats, collections, disciplines and authors. Any categories that do not contain content are not visible. The disciplines organisation is based on a customisable taxonomy developed form on of the USA library standards. Customised taxonomies can also be added. Figure 3 shows the typical layout of the browse taxonomies. It is assumed that like the look and feel of the site this can be designed to fit organisational requirements.

Figure 3 Digital Commons: Browse by disciplines pageA simple keyword search is available on all pages. This can be use to search within a single series, a single repository or across repositories. This search covers metadata as well as content. Search refinement is also available within results. Results can be outputted as a page of links, XML

(Dublin Core DTD) or as a bibliography export. This is not evident on the demo site and possible needs to be implemented separately.Figure 4 shows the advance search facility. This presents the same functions as the search refinement, but as a new search within the repository. Multiple search criteria can be added using the + button on the right hand side. The search fields include: all fields; full text; keyword; subject area; first name; last name; institution; cooperate author; date; title; abstract; publication title; discipline. The Boolean operators available are as follows: is; is not; includes; does not include; starts with; ends with. There is no help defining what each of these are, how they effect the search or what order, if any, the search criteria are applied.

Figure 4 Digital Commons: Advance search pageAlgorithms used, the effects of collections, metadata and context were not discussed in relation to search. The pages are searchable by Google and the caching can be turned off in order to force only current content to be retrieved. The search results display the authors name, year, title and publication. Each of which the results can be sorted by. Icons alongside each item denote whether the item is peer reviewed or displayed as selected works, author linked personal pages. The customisation of this was not indicated by the presenter.

Personal space Form the demonstration the only personal space with in the repository, contained the users profile details. There did not appear to be any means of retaining a list of the content added by an individual, other than the browse by authors. However an extension to the software enables individuals to have a linked web page (selected works) that acts as a CV/publications and personal details presentation.

Publication controlsThere did not appear to be any publication controls. Content checking by administrators can delay publication, but this is not an automated process.

Content LinkingAs mentioned above it is possible to link content to each other. This appears on the lower half of each individual content page.

Interface and help The interface can be fully branded as mentioned previously. The sites functions are fairly simple and intuitive to use. The FAQ provides help on the most common problems, tailored to the user account type. There was no mention of how customisable this was, or whether it came with the package as standard. This may only be provided with the demo site. Inline help is also available via the blue question marks. Sometime the content of this help does not appear to link directly to the point of entry.

AccessEach institutional repository can opt to being within the public domain, or limited access. Individual document access was not discussed. As the part of the applications structure is based on collections or communities at the upper level, it should be possible to restrict document access within these.

File storage typesAs noted previously there are no restrictions on the type or size of the file stored. The presenter did mention that there was currently no inbuilt facility to provide streaming audio or video.

Client side linking The promotional material indicates that this repository can be integrated with Blackboard. Citations can be exported to EndNote and other bibliographical software. Other than those integration with any client side applications was not discussed.

Extendibility There are several features that this system offers that extend its services beyond that of a simple repository. The personal web page and the link to social networking sites noted previously. The system also provides RSS. The most interesting addition was the ability to implement peer review workflow for the creation of digital journals via the EDKit addition.

Future developments These include extending the content harvesting capabilities and automatic metadata generation from pdf documents.

ConclusionThis was a difficult presentation; the audio conference put questions off as it was often difficult to hear what was being said. General the repository offers most of the basic features. It is lacking in personal space, although the author web page facility is a start to this sort of setup.

One of the most intriguing features here was the link to social networking or bookmarking sites. It was a small disappointment to discover this was available tool that can be embedded in any site. The search facilities were fairly adaptable being able to set multiple criteria. The lack of actions that can be performed on the search results page was inconvenient. Being able to implement a peer review process for the publication of in house journals was also a good feature. There is a distinct lack of personalisation particularly where search facilities were concerned. Overall this repository had a very average feel about it.

EPrints – Demo site onlyPresented by Alma Swan on 16th January, 2-4pm in LS104Unfortunately the presentation for this repository was missed. The Information given here has been gleaned from their demo site and wen site.EPrints is an Open source repository software current available as version 3. Advocating the open access philosophy, its aims are to give authors the ability to self-archive their work for all to view. While the software is open source the company also provides support and hosting services. This is done via their EPrints community and a series of graded packages. This community provides EPrints with feedback on the products for future development, as well as a self-support via user groups. Figure 5 shows the demo site’s home page for a logon user. The navigation bar and mini search are constant on all pages, as well as the user login information and links. Feeds available via RSS 1,2 and atom. The main page contains links to latest additions, search (which is the advanced search), browse and information about the repository. Having viewed several sites using this repository the look and feel is fully customisable.

Figure 5 EPrints: Demo site home pageThe process of uploading information to the repository is 5 staged. This is initiated from the users work area. Until an item is fully submitted it can be accessed from the work area and edited at any time. It is assumed here that all documents go through a peer review process. The first stage determines the type of document to be loaded: Article, Book Section, Monograph, Conference or Workshop Item, Book, Thesis, Patent, Other.

Again it is assumed that all standard file type are acceptable including zip which would cover learning Objects. Stage two, shown in Figure 6, requires the upload of the file and licensing details. A link to SHERPA RoMEO is present at the top of the page. Multiple files can be attached to one document submission, but is only to be used for such cases as the files are required by the primary document. For example HTML file with images. A converter is also available at the bottom of the page. This does not appear if the document is already in pdf format. The author can set the visibility of the document: anyone, registered users, and repository staff. An embargo expiry date can also be specified.

Figure 6 EPrints: Upload process stage 2Stage three is all the details about the document and author. There does not appear to be any automation services here. This requires title, creators, refereed status, publication status, and journal or publication title. All other details are optional. Keyword entry does not appear to be en encouraged field. It is present but only from a drop down partition. There is no intelligent checking of the content entered. Stage four, shown in Figure 7 is the process of adding the documents categorisation. The document can belong to several categories. This is an interactive list that expands at the plus button. It can also be searched directly. The add

button adds the subject a list at the top of the page, where they can be removed if needed.

Figure 7 EPrints: Upload process stage 4Home Page: http://www.eprints.org/Demo Site: http://demoprints.eprints.org/Support Wiki: http://wiki.eprints.org/w/Main_PageRepository of scripts, plug-ins etc: http://files.eprints.org/

MetadataMetadata is quite clearly be used. Which standards is uncertain as their wiki site search feature appears to have a database error. Will look inot this at a later date.

StandardsSee above.

VersioningThere appears to be some form of versioning within the metadata concerning the revision of the document prior to submission. Whether documents are available for updating once within the repository is not know, but it’s suspected that it isn’t.

Resource discoveryFor some reason entering search terms in the mini simple search (present on all pages) forwards you to a fresh page with search boxes, none of which contain the term you originally entered. Entering no data or random typing produces warnings for no data entered and no results found respectively. The simple search page consists of a single entry field. Boolean all or any can be applied to the search terms and the order of the results selected form: year, author and title. A simple help statement is available Enter a term or terms to search for but no explanation to the use

of all of or any of. A link to the advance search is also present. Unusually this is only found here and the front page.

Figure 8 EPrints: Advance search pageAdvance search, Figure 8, is extensive. Everything from searching the abstract, keywords (labelled uncontrolled) subjects, item type, date etc. There is drop down list at the bottom with a choice for all the conditions to be bet or some, as well as the sort by options. There is no function to allow for multiple field searches or NOT searches. Search results, Figure 9 merged from two searches, give details of the items in a bibliographic format. There is an export feature to various citation and file formats. The search can be refined using the simple search feature, or saved, and sorted by year, author title. Files associated with each result are shown as thumbnails. When a file is selected it will open up using the most appropriate client side application, usually the browser. HTML pages don’t appear to link well with their images here. This may have been the particular file viewed, the learning object shown in Figure 9.

Figure 9 EPrints: Search results (modified) Given the interactive list shown in Figure 7 for the document submission process, the browse by subject is just a simple long list of subjects. This is not very user friendly. There is also no search within this proved. Browse by year is available form the main navigation bar as a simple list. Neither of the browse process have a search within facility on the results page.

Personal space The personal space consists of a work area to view the items currently in the submission process. This gives full access to editing the submissions as well as a history of changes made. The history is presented as a series of metadata snippets showing the changes. Each time the document is accessed from the work area a revision number is increment. The majority of the history is populated with these changes, shown in Figure 10.

Figure 10 EPrints: user history viewFor some reason there does not appear to be a remove button on the document list. To do so requires viewing the documents submission process, selecting the actions tab and then destroy item. This is rather long winded taking a total of four mouse clicks. There is a profile for personal details and preferences. The preferences are for the fields shown within the work space for current documents. Saved searches are also available.

Publication controlsSo far the only publication controls identified are those relating to licence release.

Content LinkingThere does not appear to be any means of linking documents to each other, other than those that require it as part of a being a single document. See Eprints submission process above.

Interface and help Having viewed several implementations of EPrints the interface is fully customisable. The wiki provides a large amount of information on setting up and managing the repository, even if it is a little hard to find basic stuff. Author help consists of a question mark icon that adds information to the page on what to do, or what something means. The same is used for user help on the search forms.

AccessUnable to find information on access settings, assuming that there are different levels for the different user types.

File storage typesAll common file types appear to be available.

Client side linking There does not seam to be any linking to external applications client or otherwise.

Extendibility Several plug-ins and scripts are available on the web site to extend the functionality of the repository. There is currently a call out for more to be written/submitted with prizes in the offering.

Future developments As I was not at the presentation I am unable to comment on this. They are currently promoting version 3 of the repository and have a dedicated research and development team. They are also committed to user feed back via their community communications process.

Conclusion It was unfortunate that the search facilities on the sites wiki were down, limiting the amount of information. The help files and guides are mostly associated with implementation and administration but don’t give basic information like standards. There is a lot going on in this repository but some of it does not appear to have been thought out completely. Not promoting the keyword filed of document submission suggests the repository is based on its taxonomy. The search results are possibly to extensive and the lack multiple criteria for a single filed make it less flexible. The long page is also very daunting and could be achieved better with a series of interactive drop down fields. Effectively this would leave the design of the form to the user. There is a serious problem with header simple search. Via subject browsing there are two documents under Buddhism, putting Buddhism returns nothing but the extended simple search page and no warning information. Although on one occasion it did return a single document. Generally I found the site very basic. The RSS and export features are nice touches. The user history is also an interesting idea, but how useful and compensable this is I’m unsure. There is no means to view the final metadata of a document at submission or in the search results. Personal space is very focused on submission and I would like to know it the documents remain in the list after the process complete. If so this is a good feature but will it make the list unmanageable. Many of the features discussed within the other repositories are not featured here. This may be due to information and time limitations.

Open Repository - PresentationPresented by Dominic Tate on Thursday 17th, 2-4pm in JG123Open Repository is a service offered by BioMed Central for hosting and marinating a DSpace repository. The organisation has close relationships with the DSpace open source development team, providing feedback and some functionality. The service repository is usually ahead of the open source its version releases. The repository original based on research publication, but has now moved to teaching materials as well. Their philosophy is based on the idea that by creating an open repository of publications, those publications are the ones that are most likely to be cited, benefiting both author and their associated institutions. The structure of the repository is based on communities, representing the areas of the site and collections representing the content. Communities contain collections which are groups of content. Each community can contain any number of sub communities.

Figure 11 Open Repository: Leeds Met demo site home pageFigure 11 shows the home page for Open Repositories demo site for Leeds Metropolitan University. The header bar, simple search and left navigation are persistent on the majority of pages. The header bar offers links to the home page, the login users space, submission, help, giving feedback and registration/login. Some of this changes depending on the users login status. Tax navigation is persistent under the header bar on all pages. The left navigation is focused on browsing communities and collections. The right navigation on the home page offers external resource links and some

quick guides to assist the user. RSS feeds are also available at the bottom of the page. The submission process consists of 10 stages. It was not mentioned whether the workflow for this can be adjusted. Currently all content has to pass through an administration process before publication. This was a fairly long-winded process but did give the institution complete control of the content of its repository. Accept/reject/edit metadata are the process available at each stage. MSWord and PowerPoint can be converted to PDF at depending on the hosting package purchased. Home page: http://openrepository.com/Demo Site: http://demo.openrepository.com/demo/Leeds Demo Site: http://demo.openrepository.com/irlm/DSPace Home page: http://www.dspace.org/

MetadataThree types of metadata are stored with the repository: descriptive, administrative and structural. The descriptive metadata is based qualified DC, but customised versions can be implemented if necessary. Administrative metadata concerns the authorisation polices in relation to communities and user types. Structural metadata contains information on the presentation of the content to the end user Some metadata is auto generated. For instance if the publishers ID is know, this is all that needs to be entered to complete the details on the publishing related metadata. Administrators can remove or add metadata fields to the submission process. Multiple files can be attached to a single metadata manifest. The only way to split this later is to delete the original submission and resubmit the content separately. Content can be harvested by Google etc.

StandardsDC is used as the bases for the descriptive metadata. OAI-PMH (Open Archives Initiative – Protocol for Metadata Harvesting) is implemented to support harvesting and open access. W3C standards XHTML 1.0, label is present on site, but it does not validate on the site pages tested.

VersioningThe current version of DSpace does not have any versioning controls, but it is being considered for the next.

Resource discoveryBrowse comes in several forms. There is the traditional Subject, Author and Collections listings. In addition listing by title, date issued and date submitted can also be generated. Each of these lists has various sort controls on the result page, see Figure 12. Title author and subject sport a Jump to using first letter or digit, or entering the first few letters in a text box. The date based list has, jump to: by year and/or month, or manually entered date.

Figure 12 Open Repository: Browse by dateThe final browse option is that of researchers, which list all those with a personal information page. Simple search is available on all pages along with a link to the advanced search. Search is based on keyword metadata and full text indexing. The results from this produce the page shown in Figure 13. Each result list, lists the date, title and author of each piece of retrieved content. There are no quick links for downloading, tagging or social bookmarking. Citations can be exported to EndNote and Refman. Again there is a sort bar that enables users to sort by author, date or title and change the number of results shown. At the bottom of the results page what appears to be the advance search layout is presented. This is used for generating a new search, nor searching within the results, which does not feature in this repository. The advance search offers three fields, which can be used to search within specific metadata or text areas, such as keywords or abstract. Two of these fields use boolen And , Or or Not. The search can also be restricted by date, communities and collections. This is presented in the same format as shown at the bottom of Figure 13.The individual content page shown in Figure 14 presents the various metadata fields about the document. Export to bibliographic applications and file download are available here. If the content is available in more than one file type these are listed at the end of the page. The full metadata record can also be viewed and the item can be recommended via email to individuals.

Figure 13 Open Repository: Search results page

Figure 14 Open Repository: Content description page

Personal space Each author has a personal work space for keeping track of those items submitted and their status. They also can produce a web page with for their personal details and an automatically generated publications list. Each community also has its own personal page as shown in Figure 15. This search and browse, similar to those already described, but within just that community. Most recent items are displayed on the front page. The right hand navigation can offer various links including tailored help for this communities users, email subscription and RSS.

Figure 15 Open Repository: Communities home page

Publication controlsThe current version of DSpace does not have any publication controls, but it is being considered for the next.

Content LinkingDoes not appear to have any form of between document linking within the repository itself. However it does offer linking to Sheropa RoMEO project for polices on self archiving.

Interface and help As noted previously there is a couple of user help points. The home page offers guides on particular topics and help is available form the header bar at all times. The header link brings up a single HTML file with various bookmarked topics to jump to. The interface can be tailored, as with most repository hosting solutions, to the organisations requirements.

AccessContent access restrictions are available, default is all open to all, fitting with their open access philosophy. Authentication can be set up using the inbuilt system or linked to current institutional process. There seams to be four levels of user, administration author, registered and unregistered.

File storage typesWhile originally dealing with publication based files, DSpace will now handle any file type. There was no mention on file size limitations or the quantity of file space tat can be used.

Client side linking Exportation to EndNote and Refman is the only client side application linking this repository offers.

Extendibility As the Open Repository is based on the DSpace open source repository there is scope for the development and acquisition of a variety of plug-ins.

Future developments

Main of the features that are currently missing from this repository are reputed to being added to the forth coming DSpace 2. This is a fairly basic repository and there is a lot of scope for development of the more tailored functions such as linking to social networking, and versioning.

ConclusionAgain this repository had a very average feel about it. It had less unique features to offer than Digital Commons, and seamed to be considering implementing many for the next release. Its advance search was less flexible, although the ability to sort results was more extensive. The submission process seamed overly complicated and there was no quick entry root. This emphases Open repositories librarian roots, and they may find it hard to make such a system more amiable to the verity of repository uses now required. Again personalisation was at a minimal even with the personal web page implantation. The search results were vary restrained and the lack of information and options at this stage made them unhelpful.

Digitool – Presentation Presented by Robert Bley on 18th January, 11-1pm in JGG17Built on an Oracle database using the Java enterprise plate form this repository aims to provide multi-type collections. A module has been designed to identify both file types and the application they use, to make user browsing easier. The module/service based design enables search facilities to be embed in other web based applications. Search results can then be retrieved, presented local, in a new window or redirected to the repository results pages. Able to handle learning objects as well as multi-media files, each item can be linked to many collections. The item type appears to be the key concept in this repository. Access, workflows, metadata and copyright are linked to each type, give constancy across the repository. These connections are built by the administrators and many item types can be identified. A portal version of the repository is available, enabling many individual repositories to be linked together. This also has extended features, such as email and RSS, not available in the single version. There are currently no file conversion facilities in either repository or portal package. Multiple administration units can be used by many departments linking of a single repository. Giving each control over the content and workflows for their members and users

Figure 16 DigiTool: University of Melbourne front pageSubmission processes can be designed as simple or as complex as needed. Self-deposits can go through a review process or immediately into the repository. Again this is all determined in the item type descriptions.

Figure 16 DigiTool: University of Melbourne front page the front page of the University of Melbourne’s digital repository that was given as an example of DigiTool in use. This university also has an ePrints version of a repository, see URL below. Simple search is initially displayed with a link for advanced. A list of current collections is also displayed. As with al the repositories the look and feel of the repository interfaces can be tailored to the organisations branding schemes. Home page: http://www.exlibrisgroup.com/Example site used: University of Melbourne: http://dtl.unimelb.edu.au/University of Melbourne ePrints repository: http://eprints.unimelb.edu.au/

MetadataAs usually items and metadata are stored separately. This allows a single metadata file to be shared, used like a template, between many content items. This also can be applied the other way with a single content item being linked to many metadata files. This is done via a persistent id for each content object. Four types of metadata are stored: descriptive, technical, history, and preservation. Figure 17 shows an example of the metadata file for an item. This metadata can be emailed, saved or viewed by users from the search results or individual item pages.

Figure 17 DigiTool: University of Melbourne metadatSubmission of metadata for a content item consists of a verity of fields using free text and selection list. A metadata editing tool is available for downloading on the client side. It was implied that for most users this would not be required due to its complexity.

StandardsMetadata standards include MARC, Dublin Core, Metadata Object Description Schema (MODS), and Metadata Encoding and Transmission Standard (METS). OAI-PMH. Is also supported.

VersioningNo versioning system appears to be available.

Resource discoverySimple search, advanced search and browse features are all available. Figure 16 shows the simple search interface on the front page. This consists of a search field for terms or phrases. The options of Contains (default), Exact and Starts with can be applied to the terms. The search can be applied across or within particular collections. Browse is a simple affair, from the front page links the sub collections are listed. A popup box, linked to the label more at the top of the page, (see Figure 18) gives further details on the parent collection. At the lowest leave the collections contents can be viewed in the same way as the advanced search, shown in Figure 20Figure 21Figure 22.

Figure 18 DigiTool: University of Melbourne collections pageAdvance search, shown in Figure 19, gives a choice between field or XML searches. Field search only allows for two criteria with Boolean connections. This can also be narrowed down by media or file type. Again this can all be applied across or within collections.As noted above there are three views available to users when perusing search results or collection contents. The first in Figure 20 presents thumbnails of the content, a description and icons for add to my space, view metadata, save metadata and download file. The results can also be searched within using the refine link and sorted by title creator, subject and date. View two is a basic table with no images, shown in Figure 21. Along with the description and action items there is the creator and subject details. This offers a more condensed view and is also more suitable for those none media items, where a thumbnail gives no information to the user. The final view is that of the individual item, also used when an item is selected within the other two views (Figure 22). These show a greater variety of details as including those from the other two views and all the action icons. They can be flicked through using the forward and back buttons at the top of the page.

Figure 19 DigiTool: University of Melbourne advance search page

Figure 20 DigiTool: University of Melbourne search results in brief format

Figure 21 DigiTool: University of Melbourne search results in table format

Figure 22 DigiTool: University of Melbourne search results in full format

Personal space For those that are not guest users personal space is available. This enables the user to store details of items they are interested in, their searches and submit their content to the repository.

Publication controlsThere did not appear to be any control over publication dates, or links to copyright release or restrictions.

Content LinkingWhile content can be linked to a many metadata files and vice-versa, there was no mention of whether content could be directly linked to each other.

Interface and help As with all the hosted repositories interfaces could be adapted to suit institutional and user requirements. None of the presentations so far had made reference to the end user help. The example site showed that there was popup help (Figure 23) on most of the pages. This gave details of what the function of the page was and details of any actions that could be performed. Whether this was designed as part of the system, or by the institution implementing it is unknown.

AccessThe usual levels of access were available from guest, author and administrator. It was mentioned that Athens could be applied to the system as well as a number of others. Access rights were checked within the repository as well as from embedded searches in external web applications.

Figure 23 DigiTool: University of Melbourne popup help

File storage typesAll media and file types could be stored. There was no mention of being able to stream audio or video, but the type identification module enabled content to be view by the correct application on the client side. Individual file size or storage limitations were not mentioned.

Client side linking As mention above the search tool can be embedded in the secondary applications as it is a web service. No other links to client side applications were available other than for viewing purposes.

Extendibility A full API is available with this repository, Enabling the building of customised features. There did not appear to be any current add-ons available, although it was mentioned that the portal version had some extended functionality and features.

Future developments

This was not discussed.

ConclusionThis repositories strongest feature is the web service architectural design. This enables the repository to be embedded in any web page or application. As this is also one of the foremost development areas in web technologies this bodes well for the repositories ability to adapt to future web technologies. Another feature that shows a focus more on the end user and a little less on the content submission is the multiple search result views. Many of the other repositories are focused on the control of the quality of the content

within the repository and less on those who have to search it for what they need. Enable authors to just submit, without checking, directly to the repository puts control back in their court. It will still be necessary to have restrictions and checking on sensitive collections, which this repository allows as well. The advance search is both more extensive and more restricted than other repositories. Limiting the criteria number seriously the experienced searcher from getting what they want first time. This is somewhat corrected by the use of search within results but can add more work for the user.

IntraLibrary – Presentation Presented by Peter Douglas on 22nd January, 2-4pm in JG123IntraLibrary runs on a unix based Apache Tomcat server and uses a MySQL database, the J2EE platform and Java server pages. This is a bases for its service oriented architecture. Designed original as a Learning Object (LO) repository it now works with standard documents and multi-media formats. Developed by Southampton University it has strong academic background and is the software underlying JOURM the UK’s repository for Further and Higher Education. Like the repositories already discussed IntraLibrary can be customised to and organisation’s branding. It uses workflows for the process of document submission which can be adjusted to suit user needs. The administration tool kit enables the customisation of all interfaces, metadata taxonomies and user roles. Conceptually the repository is based on collections, groups and users. There is no concept of a subgroup. Roles include guest (search and access rights), contributing (upload rights), librarian (predominantly taxonomy administration rights) admin (full access rights). This repository also uses RSS and supports the use of podcasts.

Figure 24 IntraLibrary: Uploading an object

The main navigation bar on the site, see in Figure 24 in blue, has links to simple and advance search, browse, work area, admin tools, profile, help and logout. The secondary bar, purple, proved the links under each of the main categories. The small pink blocks indicate where the user is within the system.Uploading objects is fairly straight forward. Objects are divided into three types, file/package, web resource or physical resource. This is an unusual aspect of IntraLibrary in that physical resources can also be stored in the system. Then a title for the object is required. As Learning Objects have there metadata packed with them there is no need for requesting it at this point. Once the object or file is reserved in the authors workspace metadata and other details about the resource can be added before submission.

Figure 25 IntraLibrary: Reserved objects pageIntraLibrary is an icon and symbol driven user interface, using tool types to give explanations at to mean or actions. Figure 25 shows a reserved object in the user’s space. The icons to the left of the object indicate what the user can do with the object. A selection is given in Figure 26. The object in Figure 25 is looked from other users, and the current user is able to access and edit the metadata. At present the item cannot be submitted as the purple arrow button is faded out. This indicates that some data about the object is still required. By viewing the history this can be identified. Once all is complete the object can be uploaded.

Clicking this will result in the object being reserved and only editable this user.This appears once an object is reserved, click it will make it accessible to others for editing. Shows that you the user has access to metadata editing, clicking it will bring up the editor.This allows a user to view the metadata attached to the object.

This will download the metadata for an object onto the local system.This allows the user to make changes to the objects Licensing, copyright and conditions of use.

The solid button is used for submitting the object. If there is still details missing the faded button will remain.

Preview the content within anew window.

Adds field boxes or expands sections. Minus in a red square removes or closes.

Figure 26 IntraLibrary: Icon associationsHome page: http://www.intrallect.com/ Demo site: http://leedsmet.intralibrary.comManuals: http://www.intrallect.com/index.php/intrallect/support/product_documentation

MetadataBoth a taxonomy and metadata editors (see Figure 27) are included in the IntraLibrary package. These enable authorised users to customise the fields and category organisation. The metadata labels can be changed to more user oriented terms. The fields can also be set to have default values, automatic completion, or choices for the user to select from. Built in classifications included JACS, learndirect, UK educational levels, these can be customised. Different taxonomies can be related to different groups within the system.

Figure 27 IntraLibrary: Metadata editorDepending on user and content type restrictions the user can view the metadata for an object with their workspace and on search results. An example of this is given in Figure 28. This can also be download or saved as a template to be used with other content objects.

Figure 28 IntraLibrary: Metadata preview page

StandardsMany open standards have been employed in the development of this repository. These include JISC SWORD (Simple Web service Offering Repository Deposit), IMS LODE (Learning Object Discovery and Exchange), ODRL (Open Digital Rights Language), and XCRI (eXchanging Course-Related Information). Metadata standards include DC and LOM.

VersioningLOM metadata contains a version tag, which is assumed can be utilised as the repository was designed for learning objects. Whether versioning can be used with other stored content was not discussed.

Resource discoveryThe search facility is extensive, which search fields taking a wide range of operators as well as keywords and phrases. Wildcard searches available using the question mark (?) for a single character and the asterisk (*) for multiple characters. Fuzzy searches, searching for words that are similar to a give, are also supported using the tide mark (~) after the keyword. The tide is also used for proximity searches used after two words in quotes. This is followed by the maximum number of words that that they should be found within. This is only a sample of the extensive search operators, including a full range based on filed ranges and Boolean operations.

Figure 29 IntraLibrary: Results from simple searchThe simple search box that resides on the header bar, top left of Figure29, brings up the search results on the right and the advance search on the left. Advance search is also available as a link form the header bar. Advance search consists of a number of entry fields which can be increased to suit user requirements, and a drop down list containing all accessible fields, see Figure 30. Depending on the field selection the user may have a options to choose form or an free text field for keywords, phrases and the myriad of operators noted above. A search filter can be applied, and the choice of how the criteria are applied can be selected. Each search can be selected and RSS feeds created.

Figure 30 IntraLibrary: Advance search pageBrowse again uses the left right divide. The categories are displayed down the left and the results of selection appear on the right, see Figure 31. The results from both search and browse give details about each item returned

such as title, description and format. Again icons are used, with tool tips, to denote information and actions that can be performed on an object. The black and white circular icons within the items description, shown in both Figure 29 and Figure 31, denote copyright and usage restrictions. The coloured icons to the left of the object are the various actions a user can perform on the object. See Figure 26 for a list of descriptions.

Figure 31 IntraLibrary: Browse categories

Personal space Personal space consists of a work area for those LOs currently in the process of being submitted, an area for those objects already submitted and preferences. Depending on the users role, they may also have access to the metadata and taxonomy editors, and other administration tools. A user profile is also available where a user can specify the format of some of the sites common facilities. Default metadata and copyright templates can be set here, along with default search options. The session time out, and email alerts can also be configured here.

Publication controlsThere was no mention of publication controls already built into the site.

Content LinkingMetadata can be viewed and have links to other objects with similar metadata

Interface and help All the interfaces are customisable and the icon driven actions and information are fairly straightforward and easy to use. The twin header bars show a user where they are on the site at all times. The left write divided means users can see what they are doing alongside the results of their actions. As well as the tool tips there is a comprehensive help page that runs in a separate window, shown in Figure 32. This provides explanations and

instructions on all the repositories features. Full developer information with guides and Q&A are also available form the website.

Figure 32 IntraLibrary: Help pages

AccessThere appears to be the usual roles with varying levels of access rights. It was not mentioned whether these could be set for different content and groups as well as users.

File storage typesThere appeared to be no restrictions on content type or file sizes.

Client side linking Integration into the most popular VLEs is available such as Moodle and Blackboard. The system supports an open source SRU client, which enables the system to be embed in remote web applications. This is not entirely clear form the literature and it was commented on at he presentation. This needs to be investigated further.

Extendibility The basic system can be extended to use a peer rating system and a peer comments system. I full API is also available for custom functions to be developed.

Future developments One of the future developments that was discussed was the building of an RAE reporting system for the research publications side of the repository.

ConclusionSo far this appears to be the most promising repository. As it has been built for learning objects it is very focussed on the idea of user discovery, metadata and search. The search facilities in particular are vary expressive and cater for a wide range of user abilities. The results are presented in a clear format. The screen division helps keep track of what you are doing and the results of your actions. I particularly like the use of buttons and icons as a lot of functionality can be placed in a small space. It would be useful to know whether this system covers all aspects of accessibility and how it scales to a text only browser. The other thing that was evident form the layout and search was the focus on the end user as apposed to the submission process and administrators. The other repositories have very different roots to this one and appear to focus their concerns on what is the repository rather than how to make it useful and accessible to a wider audience. The help information that is provided has certainly been well thought out, and gives a stronger impression than within the other systems. The API, service orientated architecture and open source standards driven development give this system a strong foundation for future development. It offers a user friendly interface in which process are not excessively long and do not have to be completed all at once. The search facilities, and conceptual organisation of content make this a powerful tool.

Hive – Presentation Presented by John Bell on 23nd January, 2-4pm in JG123Hive is the repository produced by HarvestRoad an Australian based company. It is the product of working closely with key organisations such as the IMS and ADL as well as providers of eLearning systems and software. They foster a philosophy of openness and encourage institutions to use Hive in a way that suits their requirements. Hive tools can be integrated with other repositories as well as other tools being able to integrate with Hive. This is evident with their support of the Open Knowledge Initiative (OKI) and implantation of the OSID (Open Service Interface Definitions). One of the first things to note about this particular repository is there is no demo site, and thus no images shown here. There promotion is based on case studies and broachers. The reason for this is that Hive can be tailored so specifically to an insinuations requirements that promoting one feature above another just doesn’t get it’s point across. Service based architecture; an extensive API and development environment and component based concepts enable this product to produce what ever workflow or integration an organisation needs. This is not an all or nothing system but one built on a series of service providing modules that enables what’s needed to be acquired when its needed. For example: copyright and intellectual property rights are protected via a sophisticated system referred to as ACE (Advance Copyright Engine). This enables the monitory and reporting of document usage. The concepts that make hive flexible is the idea that an item type is defined not only as a particular file or content type, but has a particular user type or group that can manipulate it in particular ways. These user and group types can all be tailored to specific access and action rights. This makes it possible to completely personalise how an individual interacts with content. Web site: http://www.harvestroad.com/index.cfm

MetadataMetadata can be attached to files single or as groups and even content within content. It can be imported or exported to various sources. Standards such as IMS/SCORM or DC (Dublin Core) can be used, or customised. There are no predefined workflows so metadata can be entered by anyone who has the correct authorisation, and reviewing can be applied. HarvestRoad have developed a client side plug-in that utilises the functionality of RELOAD (Reusable eLearning Object Authoring and Delivery) refered to as Hive Explorer. This enables the packaging, and reassembly of learning objects and their metadata.

StandardsThere is along list of standards implement by this repository and its close association and research with JISC and ADL keeps it on top of the game. These include: IMS, ADL/SCORM, Dublin Core, and XML based standards.

VersioningThis repository provides true versioning and controlled editing, so it can facilitate document storage and distribution form concept to final publication. This enables collaborative work to be stored and worked with through their system of workflows, access rights and content locking.

Resource discoveryBasic and advance search, across text and metadata, are available. How this is utilised and presented is up to the organisation. As stated in the broacher: the degree of refinement is limited only by the extent to which you describe your data. Search can be within content or within metadata only, with Boolean connectors. If several metadata schemas are being used within the repository their fields are semantically mapped. Again this is completely configurable. It is possible to search within a single hive repository, referred to as a bureau. Across several bureau hosted on a single server or across repositories hosted elsewhere.

Personal space From the information gathered there does not appear to be any form of personal space within the repository itself. The client side Explorer application appears to take this role on, with the users desktop acting as the personal storage and organisational area. The client side application allows full drag and drop facilities, as well as metadata editing, packaging and re-assembly. The plug-in for MS Office also facilitates the use of the clients environment as their personal space.

Publication controlsThere does not appear to be any means to facilitate this.

Content LinkingThis was not directly mentioned.

Interface and help As there is no demo site and just about everything is customisable, it is assumed that layout and design are produced by the institution and therefore not a reflection of the products features. User based help is not discussed and may be entirely institutionally implemented. There are guides, training and technical support proved on their web site.

AccessHive does provide their own access and authentication to individuals and groups. It is also possibly to link the repository to authentication systems currently used by the institution.

File storage typesThere is no limitations on file type or file sizes.

Client side linking Already mention above is the Hive Explorer for learning object packaging. HarvestRoad also provided a plug-in for MS Office that facilities publishing of material to the repository without leaving this familiar environment. It is also able to act as the knowledge source for virtual learning environments and link with other current repositories.

Extendibility The system is fully extendable via a Java API and the HarvestRoad Hive development kit. A development community does exist for the promotion of ideas and sharing of new plug-ins or other developments.

Future developments They have strong ties with current repository research and standards development. According to their literature they are currently involved with CORDRA (Content Object Repository Discovery and Registration/resolution Architecture). This research is looking at the development of future service models with partners Sun Microsystems, Academic ADL CO Lab and the University of Hull.

ConclusionThis is bar far the best of the repositories seen so far. How you use it is only limited by your imagination. The only downside is that having a tailored repository, comes with a price. Fortunately the module based architecture enables the implementation to be done in stages. There is very little to say here, and I imagine that selling a product that has no concrete and visible structure is fairly hard. The ideas and concepts behind the system are amazing. The ability to arrange things just as required and build on them when needed is just excellent. This gives individuals, groups, departments and faculties autonomy while providing a full accessible institution wide repository. It’s fair to say the only thing that is not adaptable within Hive is the content, although many versions of that may exist.