[Dspace-general] Comparison of EPrints, DSpace and Fedora (fwd)

Sat Dec 10 18:59:04 EST 2005

Arthur,

I understand what you are saying, and I agree with much of it.  While  
it's only one (and probably incomplete) method to do so, we are  
hoping that by gathering various scenarios from multiple  
institutions, we are gathering some sense of what type of  
functionality people require.  I understand this factor may, in fact,  
end up not reflecting the choices that *people* make, but I hope  
there's some connection between what people state they need, and what  
software they choose accordingly.  Then again, I've always believed  
that economists are the only ones who really believe that people make  
rational choices :-)  It may be the case that people are simply  
making choices because they feel compelled to do so, and don't have a  
road map or guideline for making choices.  Without some sort of  
objective and rigorous analysis, people most probably can not make  
informed or even consistent decisions.  What we are attempting to do  
is not easy, and requires a fairly unique set of expertise.  In other  
cases, people may not have the resources to conduct a more thorough  
review.

I would hope that by identifying and delineating relative strengths  
and weaknesses of various systems, we might encourage developers to  
refrain from building the entire set of functionality within their  
particular software, and rather interface with other software that  
offers complementary functionality.

Regarding the point about researchers as "searcher" as opposed to  
"author" I would welcome further feedback from you.  Would you be  
willing to develop scenarios that reflect these distinct roles as you  
see them?  I would also be eager to hear what you may have heard from  
others in response to your original message.  Thanks.

Sayeed

On Dec 10, 2005, at 5:50 PM, Arthur Sale wrote:

> Sayeed
>
>
>
> Thank you for this email. It was interesting to read and look at  
> the wiki, but I think what I am asking is completely orthogonal to  
> what you are doing. I am not looking to choose software, nor to  
> evaluate their technical features. May I say however, that you do  
> not distinguish between the roles of researcher as “searcher” and  
> as “author” which are two completely disjoint roils and which  
> demand separate attention.
>
>
>
> Rather, I am trying to find out why *people* choose the software  
> they do. Many choices are puzzling, and the stated reasons are  
> often simply absurd. When implementation costs for an IR range from  
> $3k to $1M, something is going on that is unexplained. Partly that  
> is explained by different purposes for IRs (for example for some  
> IRs digital preservation is a non-issue; for others it is high on  
> the priority list even if long-term solutions are not available).
>
>
>
> Until we resolve why people choose what they do, we are destined to  
> walk in the dark, especially the developers in adding features to  
> IR software, which already show some signs of software bloat.
>
>
>
> Arthur
>
>
>
> From: Sayeed Choudhury [mailto:sayeed at jhu.edu]
> Sent: Sunday, 11 December 2005 06:44
> To: Stevan Harnad
> Cc: dspace-tech at MIT.EDU; dspace-general at MIT.EDU; eprints- 
> tech at ecs.soton.ac.uk; Fedora-users-list; ahjs at ozemail.com.au;  
> diglib at infoserv.inist.fr
> Subject: Re: [Dspace-general] Comparison of EPrints, DSpace and  
> Fedora (fwd)
>
>
>
> ** Apologies for receipt of duplicate postings **
>
>
>
> Arthur,
>
>
>
> I have noted your message on more than one list, so I've taken the  
> liberty of copying each of them to inform individuals who follow  
> those lists. Regarding a comparison of repository software, our  
> group at Johns Hopkins is conducting a technology-based analysis of  
> repositories and applications with funding from the Mellon  
> Foundation. Our choices include DSpace, Fedora, ePrints, Digital  
> Commons (ProQuest's offering based on BePress), and applications  
> include Sakai, and various e-publishing systems such as Open  
> Journal Systems (OJS), and DiVA. We are working with the DPubS team  
> to include their software as well, and we're also considering if we  
> can include Moodle and LionShare as well. Finally, we have a strong  
> emphasis on digital preservation capabilities for the repositories.  
> The main purpose of our analysis is to examine each of these  
> systems with a transparent, clearly defined methodology beginning  
> with stories or scenarios that are mapped into use cases and what  
> we are calling key events, from which we are defining functional  
> requirements for repositories to support various types of content  
> and uses. In addition to the repositories and applications, we are  
> examining whether JSR-170, OKI DR OSIDs and perhaps an  
> implementation of IMS DRI can support integration of repositories  
> and applications through a generalized interface layer that spans  
> across different services without specific out of band agreements.
>
>
>
> While we haven't included costs information, we have tracked  
> installation issues, features, and other technology matters.  
> Ultimately, we hope to develop a methodology that might allow the  
> community to address the types of question you describe with an  
> objective, rigorous approach, and a taxonomy of repositories that  
> will allow us to identify gaps in functionality.
>
>
>
> Our project wiki is available at https://wiki.library.jhu.edu/ 
> display/RepoAnalysis/ProjectRepository
>
>
>
> You can also find further information at http://ldp.library.jhu.edu/ 
> projects/repository
>
>
>
> From this web page, you can find our original proposal to the  
> Mellon Foundation and two presentations at previous CNI and DLF  
> conferences under the "Documents" tab.
>
>
>
> I would be happy to answer any questions you (or others) might have  
> in this regard.
>
>
>
> Sayeed
>
>
>
>
>
> Sayeed Choudhury
>
> Associate Director for Library Digital Programs
>
> Hodson Director of the Digital Knowledge Center
>
> Sheridan Libraries
>
> Johns Hopkins University
>
> sayeed at jhu.edu
>
> http://ldp.library.jhu.edu
>
>
>
>
>
> On Nov 19, 2005, at 6:53 PM, Stevan Harnad wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *Forwarding: apologies for cross-posting **
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>
> Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 08:27:46 +1100
>
> From: Arthur Sale <ahjs at ozemail.com.au>
>
> To: AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM at LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG
>
> Subject: Comparison of EPrints, DSpace and Fedora
>
>
>
> I am doing a comparison of functionality and adopter experiences  
> for the two
>
> most widely used institutional archive-creating software packages for
>
> repositories: EPrints and DSpace, and also Fedora (a minor player  
> globally
>
> but possibly important in Australia). I am seeking your help in  
> collecting
>
> information. Information about other packages would also be welcome.
>
>
>
> (1) If you have used or compared any of this software, could you
>
> please take the time to let me know what you consider the respective
>
> advantages/disadvantages of each to be, and for what purposes? I am  
> also
>
> interested in features that you think are equivalent or readily  
> achieved
>
> in each.
>
>
>
> (2) The two major software packages explain their orientation as
>
> follows: EPrints puts a particular emphasis on OA content (preprints
>
> and postprints of institutional research output, plus theses), DSpace
>
> on digital curation in general. Fedora describes itself as repository
>
> storage layer software requiring custom front-ends for any purpose. If
>
> you have any specific comments on these overall orientations and
>
> whether they are appropriate, they would be very helpful too.
>
>
>
> (3) While all these packages are free and open source, I would also
>
> be interested in any cost estimates in implementing the one you chose,
>
> how many hours or dollars you spent on setup, how much maintenance you
>
> have to expend, and how reliable the software is (crashes, downtime,
>
> etc). Would you recommend it to someone else?
>
>
>
> I will post a summary of the results (and maybe an interim report)  
> on AmSci
>
> OA Forum, and may get back to you if I reed a bit more detail.  
> Thank you in
>
> anticipation of a prompt response and a flood of emails. Email  
> direct to me
>
> at Arthur.Sale at utas.edu.au if you want.
>
>
>
> Arthur Sale
>
> Professor of Computing (Research)
>
> University of Tasmania
>
> http://leven.comp.utas.edu.au/AuseAccess/
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Dspace-general mailing list
>
> Dspace-general at mit.edu
>
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/dspace-general
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/dspace-general/attachments/20051210/8e102084/attachment.htm