> > Yes - I have skimmed this. At present I don't think the OKF > should be involved in making individual theses Open, but it > would be very useful to have formal statements of the types > of Openness that are in use. > > One things that we really need for all this scholarly > Openness is an index of institutions , with uniquids. My > simplistic view at present is that for each institution we have: > * uniquid
Might be worth having a look at this recent post from the Names project about their Institutional URIs and recommendations from the NISO working group on Institutional Identifiers? http://namesproject.wordpress.com/2010/07/06/identifying-institutions/ > * URL/URI of its repository > * table of contents of theses (this does not exist in many > repositories). It might be machine extracted if we can get > the whole repopsitory TOC > * annotation of each entry's bibliographic metatdata to > include Openness of each thesis. > The UKETD DC Application Profile uses the dc.rights to store rights metadata - but I guess we may need something more structured for machine parsability? What might be useful from the UKETD DC AP is the relatively well structured 'embargo' metadata. See http://ethostoolkit.cranfield.ac.uk/tiki-index.php?page_ref_id=47 for more detail. Clearly this is UK based, and it isn't clear how many repositories have implemented this fully, but it is what EThOS recommends is used, and I think (from memory) the Embargo fields werer intended to be functional for EThOS. Owen -- The Open University is incorporated by Royal Charter (RC 000391), an exempt charity in England & Wales and a charity registered in Scotland (SC 038302). _______________________________________________ okfn-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-discuss
