1. ARROW Institutional Repositories for Managing e-Theses Presentation to ETD2005 29 September 2005 Geoff Payne, ARROW Project Manager

2. ARROW Institutional Repositories, Sept 2005 2 ARROW - Summary of design criteria  A generalised institutional repository solution for research information management  Initial focus on managing and exposing traditional “print equivalent” research outputs  Expanded to managing other digital research outputs  Design decisions accommodate management of other digital objects such as learning objects and research inputs such as large data sets  DEST Research reporting and audit, and Research Quality Framework likely to drive deposit of content by academics and research managers in ARROW universities

3. ARROW Institutional Repositories, Sept 2005 3 ARROW Web Site Project Information National Library of Australia Swinburne UNSW Monash ARROW Repository Digital Object Storage using Fedora & VITAL Members only area for Meeting Minutes etc National Library of Australia ARROW Resource Discovery Service Using TeraText to index metadata harvested by OAI PMH ARROW Open Access Journal Publishing System Using OJS from Public Knowledge Project Internet Search Engines indexing content specifically exposed by by ARROW Repositories ARROW Branded Services Profile Internet Aust Digital Theses Program Australian Theses Discovery Service Using metadata harvested by OAI PMH Research Management Systems Sharing descriptive metadata and linking from an RMS to the research publications

4. ARROW Institutional Repositories, Sept 2005 4 ARROW Architecture & software components Fedora VITAL, Fedora, OJS VITAL Access Portal, OAI/PMH, SRU/SRW, Web Exposure

5. ARROW Institutional Repositories, Sept 2005 5 Web Services Fedora Repository Vital Proprietary Management Client, Access Portal Open Source Web Services Open Journal Systems Software

6. ARROW Institutional Repositories, Sept 2005 6 ARROW Metadata Strategy  Supports metadata schemata to suit individual data models  No requirement to shoehorn all metadata into one schema  Each stored object can retain metadata developed for it by the community of practice which generated the object  Maintains flexibility to store many types of digital objects in the repository  No need to anticipate every object type now  Maps metadata to Dublin core to populate the ARROW Discovery Service

7. ARROW Institutional Repositories, Sept 2005 7 OCLC Metadata Interoperability Core From: Godby, Smith and Childress. 2003. “Two paths to interoperable metadata” p. 3 at http://www.oclc.org/research/publications/archive/2003/godby-dc2003.pdf http://www.oclc.org/research/publications/archive/2003/godby-dc2003.pdf

8. ARROW Institutional Repositories, Sept 2005 8 ARROW stages  Demonstration (2004)  Developing architecture, selecting, testing and developing software  Deployment (late 2004 – end 2005)  Populating the ARROW Partners’ repositories  Distribution (mid 2005 – end 2006)  Enabling others to participate  Under review for earlier participation by others

9. ARROW Institutional Repositories, Sept 2005 9 Theses in ARROW Data modelling establishes the level of granularity at which  Access control can be applied eg  Abstract  Individual chapters  Bibliography  Accompanying materials can be individually stored and linked to the thesis  Individual pieces can be cited or re-used in new contexts  Efficiency of downloading of the thesis  Chapter at a time rather than as a whole  Comments welcome on the data model in the printed paper

10. ARROW Web Self Submission Tool Katie Blake ARROW Implementation Consultant

11. ARROW Institutional Repositories, Sept 2005 11 The Web Self-Submit tool  Allows users to complete a web form with their details, and to attach documents  Documents appear in a ‘holding bay’  3 stage review process allows confirmation of details and files  Email confirmations to submitter and supervisor

12. ARROW Institutional Repositories, Sept 2005 12 The submit process

13. ARROW Institutional Repositories, Sept 2005 13 Personal information

14. ARROW Institutional Repositories, Sept 2005 14 Document information

15. ARROW Institutional Repositories, Sept 2005 15 Committee information

16. ARROW Institutional Repositories, Sept 2005 16 Availability

17. ARROW Institutional Repositories, Sept 2005 17 Review

18. ARROW Institutional Repositories, Sept 2005 18 Attach documents

19. ARROW Institutional Repositories, Sept 2005 19 Review, edit or confirm

20. ARROW Institutional Repositories, Sept 2005 20 Confirmation email

21. ARROW Institutional Repositories, Sept 2005 21 Three review stages

22. ARROW Institutional Repositories, Sept 2005 22 Review Stage 1

23. ARROW Institutional Repositories, Sept 2005 23 Confirm approval

24. ARROW Institutional Repositories, Sept 2005 24 The Portal view

25. ARROW Summary

26. ARROW Institutional Repositories, Sept 2005 26 VITAL 2.0 capabilities  Manual or batch ingest of digital objects by partner staff  Automatic assignment of Handles persistent identifiers  JHOVE content validation  MARCXML metadata to Dublin Core transformation  Advanced searching  SRU/SRW  OAI harvesting to populate the ARROW Discovery Service  User configured indexing  User defined Fedora object structures  Web submission tool for end user e-theses deposit

27. ARROW Institutional Repositories, Sept 2005 27 VITAL 2.0 capabilities  Web based deposit for theses  Followed by review and manual ingest by staff  By November, cloning this for images, journal articles, books, book chapters, working papers, conference papers pending software development for generic content model management  Batch ingest tool  Match metadata files and object files on various criteria  Exposure of content to web search engines  VITAL 2.1 will be based on Fedora 2.0  Improved user interface including browsing  VITAL 3 to include integration with Fedora 2.1  Support for XACML access controls  Support for OAI Sets for metadata harvesting

28. ARROW Institutional Repositories, Sept 2005 28 Building on ARROW August 2005 Strategic Infrastructure Initiative funding announced for (among others): DART (Monash University as lead institution)  Supporting the e-research lifecyle  Includes managing large datasets in the ARROW repositories  Interfacing Fedora and Storage Resource Broker or similar technologies  Managing annotations RUBRIC (University of Southern Queensland as lead institution)  Evaluating ARROW as part of identifying repository solutions for regional universities in Australia and New Zealand  Application to management of learning objects IP management in repositories (Queensland University of Technology lead institution)  Including Creative Commons Australianisation

29. ARROW Institutional Repositories, Sept 2005 29 Summary Functionality In Hand:  VITAL Manager can ingest content and metadata edited externally with XMLSpy – Not for the casual user  Web submission for theses  Batch Ingest matching metadata and digital objects  Access portal for searching  Access Explorer for specifying indexing Still to come: Imminent  Web ingest for other content types  Enhanced user interface with browse capabilities  RM4 interface Early 2006  XACML Access control at Object and datastream levels  Support for OAI Sets for metadata harvesting Mid 2006  Generalised content model management

30. ARROW Institutional Repositories, Sept 2005 30 Questions? Further information? Details of the ARROW project can be found at: arrow.edu.au The ARROW site includes links to the FRODO projects and a glossary of repository acronyms and projects