Digital object repository software

Greenstone¶

• website: http://www.greenstone.org/
  

• spec sheet
  

• How to build a digital collection Most irritating ebook ever, available through UW Libraries. It is basically the how-to manual for greenstone.
  I failed to find much substance here.
  

• Greenstone developer's handbook, chapter on import and build processes
  

News, reviews, and articles about Greenstone¶

1. Bainbridge, D., Osborn, W., Witten, I.H. & Nichols, D.M. (2006). Extending Greenstone for Institutional Repositories. In Digital Libraries: Achievements, Challenges and Opportunities, 9th International Conference on Asian Digital Libraries, ICADL 2006, Kyoto, Japan, November 27-30, 2006(pp. 303-312). Berlin: Springer. Abstract: We examine the problem of designing a generalized system for building institutional repositories. Widely used schemes such as DSpace are tailored to a particular set of requirements: fixed metadata set; standard view when searching and browsing; pre-determined sequence for depositing items; built-in workflow for vetting new items. In contrast, Fedora builds in flexibility: institutional repositories are just one possible instantiation—however generality incurs a high overhead and uptake has been sluggish. This paper shows how existing components of the Greenstone software can be repurposed to provide a generalized institutional repository that falls between these extremes.
   

CONTENTdm¶

• website: http://www.contentdm.org/
  

• spec sheet:
  

News, reviews, and articles about CONTENTdm¶

1. Infomancy.net An interesting blog from a digital librarian POV about CONTENTdm. He makes it sound like CDM is far from straight forward and user-friendly.
2. Reese and Banerjee, 2008 p. 60-69: CONTENTdm was designed to provided access to static images. It assumes that a librarian will be managing the collection and staff commitment to managing metadata is assumed. CONTENTdm allows for more granular control than DSpace. As of 2008 DSpace was not recommended by authors for management of serials (managing resources based on publication patterns). CONTENTdm has OCR and may be reasonably well suited for scanned books, newspapers, etc.
   Top
3. Arlitsch, K., & Jonsson, J. (2005). Aggregating distributed digital collections in the Mountain West Digital Library with the CONTENTdmTM multi-site server. Library Hi Tech. 23 (2), 220-232.
   

Fedora Commons¶

• website: http://www.fedora-commons.org/
• spec sheet
• Features
• Batch processing page
  • Bainbridge, D. W., Ian H. (2009). A fedora librarian interface. A clearly-written article about using the Fedora Librarian Interface with Fedora. It is basically the Greenstone interface. Examples of ingest processes are described. Plug-in emphasized. Demonstrates how this interface is supposed to make it easier to ingest things for a less-technically inclined person.
    

Capcity¶

Interface/ease of use¶

Access to contect¶

Security/stability issues¶

News, reviews, and articles about Fedora Commons¶

1. Moore Foundation funding, 2007
2. Discussion of DSpace/Fedora merger, 2009
3. From Reese and Banerjee, 2008, p. 60: Fedora's advantages are that it is very flexible (Fedora may interact with any application that can interact with SOAP messages), it is OAI compliant and can act as a "meta repository" that provides access to content maintained by others. It's disadvantage is that it requires technical knowledge to operate effectively; authors recommend this system only if content is complex.
   

DSpace¶

• website:http://www.dspace.org/
• spec sheet
  

News, Reviews and articles about DSpace¶

1. Reese and Banerjee, 2008, 60-69. Authors point out that DSpace was conceived of as a way for researchers to self-publish and manage their articles. This system is designed so that contributors are largely responsible for the content and organization of information in DSpace, and that the system is designed to support research papers and data more than images, video, etc. Also, as of 2008 DSpace was not well suited for managing serials.
   

General works about Digital Repositories¶

1. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, Volume 47 Issue 3 & 4 2009, Special issue on Metadata and Open Access Repositories
2. Reese, T., & Banerjee, K. (2008). Building digital libraries: A how-to-do-it manual. New York: Neal-Schuman.
3. Rhyno, A. (2003). Using open source systems for digital libraries. Westport, Conn: Libraries Unlimited.
   Top
4. archivemati.ca Blog post on digital repository software from the archives perspective. Emphasized the actions and processes that surround the system rather than the software itself: "Their research project then shifted focus to produce an excellent set of Ingest and Maintain (storage) guidelines. In other words, it moved from the concept of a digital archives as a software application to the OAIS concept of an archival information system as a “an organization of people and systems that has accepted the responsibility to preserve information and make it available for a designated community.”"