Page Comparison

...

Project Purpose

Project Title:	Dspace Institutional Repository Implementation
Project Owner:	David Lacy	Project Manager:	Gabe Galson
Date Prepared:	11 Jun 2018
Project Customer:Primary Stakeholder	Annie Johnson (Unlicensed)
Tech Lead	Chin U. Kim
Metadata Specialist	Holly Tomren
Stakeholders	Annie Johnson (Unlicensed), ScholCom ScholCom Team, Symplectic Team, Digitization Team	, Gretchen Sneff, Margery Sly

Intended Users/Audience
Annie Johnson, Symplectic Team, ScholCom Team, Digitization Team, Temple grad students, Temple Faculty

Background
For several years now, the library has evaluated the feasibility of implementing an institutional repository. The project gained momentum with the implementation of Symplectic Elements and the option provided therein where a direct connection could be made between the two systems. With this connection, a faculty member can deposit a copy of their publication directly into the IR through Elements, thus simplifying the overall process for faculty and researchers. Dspace was selected as the software of choice because of its interoperability with Symplectic Elements.
High-Level Project Description
The implementation of Dspace will be phased. The first phase is to set up the connection between Dspace and Symplectic. The second phase is to incorporate the ETD process into Dspace. This phase will include an update to the connection with ProQuest for the ETD delivery and a migration of the current ETDs in CONTENTdm to Dspace DSpace 6.2 will be installed and tested through the Elements Dev and Prod instances.

High Level Requirements

The Dspace project will be considered complete once the following requirements are met:

Dspace is installed and available for use.
The Open Access Module is installed on Symplectic Elements
The connection is made between the OA Module on SE and Dspace and data/information is successfully transmitted between the two systems.
Metadata mappings and practices are functional, clearly defined, and sustainable
Elements->DSpace deposit workflow functions in line with Temple Faculty and ScholCom team’s needs.
The ETD procurement process is updated with ProQuest for all new ETDs.
The current ETDs in CONTENTdm are migrated to Dspace.

is a stakeholder because of the connection between the IR and Special Collections

Summary Milestones	Due Date
Install Dspace and provide access to functional area admins	29 Jun 2018
Establish connection between Elements and Dspace	30 Aug 2018
Harvest ETDs into Dspace and establish recurring harvest process	27 Sep 2018
Stakeholder	Role
Annie	is the primary stakeholder for the functional implementation of Dspace as the leader of the Scholarly Communications Strategic Steering Team.
Gretchen	is a stakeholder as the leader of the Research Data Management Strategic Steering Team. Gretchen's primary purpose will be to evaluate Dspace for future research data management opportunities. Any work related to research data management will not be a direct part of this initial implementation project, but may be considered as a future project.
Stefanie	is a stakeholder because of her role in managing the Electronic Theses and Dissertations.
Margery	Timeline
Summary: The implementation of Dspace will be phased. The first phase is to set up the connection between Dspace and Symplectic and to incorporate the ETD process into Dspace. This phase will include an update to the connection with ProQuest for the ETD delivery and a migration of the current ETDs in CONTENTdm to Dspace. The second phase will be to make content hosted in DSpace accessible through a native or Blacklight-based interface.
Phase 1: June, 2018- January, 2019 Phase 2: January, 2019- May 2019

Infrastructure/software requirements	Technical Specifications
Server for DSpace V 6.2
Storage Space
Elements Production Instance
Elements Development Instance

Assumptions
The DSpace-Elements Repository Connection allows us to maintain acceptable metadata standards and implement policies that work for ScholCom and the faculty community. Hosting ETDs in DSpace will allow the support of current ETD policies, such as the embargo policy currently in place, and support a sustainable ETD ingest and metadata workflow.

Risks/Constraints

Mapping/crosswalking work could be substantial and ongoing, due to the ever-widening scope of the Elements implementation, future software upgrades, and changes to Temple’s metadata standards.
Beyond Phase 1, DSpace implementation and customization may take more technical support than 1 non-developer tech lead
This project could generate a significant amount of recurring work that must be absorbed.

Options (ETD Workflow)

Option 1 [ETDs]: Feed current ETD workflow into DSpace

Assumptions:

The XSLT transformation process can be adapted to create a file uploadable through DSpace
Maintaining consistency between older and newer ETD metadata will be easier through this approach

Risks/constraints:

Option 2 [ETDs]: Feed ETDs from Proquest directly into DSpace via SWORDv2

Assumptions:

Could simplify and make more adaptable the ETD ingest workflow, and cut down on staff time.

Risks/constraints:

New metadata workflows would have to be devised to replace the work Phil, Stefanie and Celio currently do

Options: Public Access to DSpace materials

Option 1 [Access]: Materials presented through DSpace UI

Assumptions:

Some contact between users and the DSpace UI may be necessary to index ETDs in Blacklight

Risks/constraints:

Customizing the UI is somewhat of a waste of effort, providing access entirely through Blacklight would be preferable

Option 2 [ETDs]: Feed ETDs from Proquest directly into DSpace via SWORDv2

Assumptions:

Could simplify and make more adaptable the ETD ingest workflow, and cut down on staff time.

Risks/constraints:

New metadata workflows would have to be devised to replace the work Phil, Stefanie and Celio currently do

Best Option + Rationale:

As development/implementation proceeds the options will be evaluated. As of now all options defined are still open.

Versions Compared