<div><span class="gmail_quote">On 6/25/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Robert Tansley</b> <<a href="mailto:roberttansley@google.com">roberttansley@google.com</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
The only real solution is to have backlinks in the PDFs etc -- the PDF<br>you disseminate doesn't necessarily need to be a bit-perfect copy of<br>your archival copy. It wouldn't be too hard to build a Media Filter
<br>that copies the PDF and adds a link to the top of the copy; you could<br>allow this PDF to be indexed rather than the archival copy.</blockquote><br>I think this is worth discussing. Though I worry about separating the dissemination copy from the archival copy, context (such as backlinks) is important. Non-PDF bitstreams would also need to be considered.
<br><br>It's a shame that there's no format like RTFD (RTF + directory bundle)
which would allow metadata to be distributed along with an archival
bitstream. <br>
<br></div>I've been thinking about the "surround" context info wanted for a dissemination copy. Here are my thoughts:<br>* basic item metadata (at least title, author, date) [because some items don't self-disclose]
<br>* link to the DSpace metadata/item page<br>* repository name, location, and link [because handles obscure provenance]<br>* collection name(s) and link [for awareness of related items]<br>* date of download (such as you see these days on downloads from
<a href="http://nature.com">nature.com</a>) [for citation purposes]<br><br>Using a MediaFilter would require time and/or space for generation/storage. It might also decrease the dissemination of archival copies. Are there other disadvantages?
<br><br>-Jodi<br>