Open Repositories 2012Campus-based Publishing Repository Integrator(CAPRI)Benjamin Kay, Dr. John Whelan, Dr. Tanko Ishaya, Chris Awre, Professor Martin Goodman (University of Hull)

Introduction

• About the University of Hull Campus-based Publishing Platform project

• Justification for CAPRI

• Development of CAPRI

• Evaluation of CAPRI

• Conclusion and recommendations

Campus-based Publishing Platform

• Platform to enable Open Access publishing across range of University publishing output

• JISC-funded project in Scholarly Communications strand

• Key features:

– Automatic conversion of submission (DOCX) to distribution (EPUB, Kindle, PDF) formats

– Repository Integration

– Peer review models to support range of output

– Print-on-Demand

Campus-based Publishing Platform

• Why we chose to integrate the platform with the repository

– Development of manuscripts into publications, including reviewer comments, traceable through repository;

– OAI-PMH repository interoperability

– Raises visibility and profile of CBPP

– Authentication and authorisation measures, backup and disaster recovery plans, provide logical, managed location to store artefacts

Campus-based Publishing Repository Integrator (CAPRI) Justification• Existing tools for integrating with Fedora Repository

– SWORD (swordapp.org)– Fedora REST API Drupal Module

(github.com/dongourley/fedora_rest)– OJS SWORD plug-in

• We had specific requirements

– Integration with automatic conversion processes and workflow

– Population of XML templates to drive Hydra interface

The Aim

CBPP Conversion Tools

Draft 1..n

Published Version

UoH Hydra Repo’

Versioned Artefacts

CAPRIHydra

Discovery Interface

CBPP Discovery Interface

How CAPRI works

• Creates abstraction of Fedora Digital Object within platform before communication with repository

• Properties and methods pertain to Fedora REST API-A/M

– Properties: PID, namespace, datastreams– Methods: Get/set PID, namespace, datastreams– Hydra-specific methods: makeHydraCompliant

• Uses Proxy design pattern to interface with REST methods (uses PHP Pest OSS class for REST methods)

• Code sample at: http://goo.gl/bofqz

CAPRI Code Sample

• Constructor sets repository credentials and URL from central config

CAPRI Code Sample

• Getters and setters for Digital Object properties

• Hydra-related setters construct additional datastreams through populating template XML files

CAPRI Code Sample

• createObject method uses POST verb to HTTP request the repository API URL

• Object properties passed in the URL string and POST arguments

Evaluation of CAPRI

• What was user perception of CAPRI? And the wider CBPP?

• Case Studies

– Creative Publishing• Umber

• Writing Hull– Scholarly Publishing

• Staff and Postgraduate survey

• Staff interviews (limited)

Umber

• Anthology of new writing from students, associates and staff of the MA in Creative Writing

• 18 contributing authors

• Versioned artefacts stored privately in the repository

• Focus group held at publication launch event

Writing Hull (awaiting publication)

• Anthology of new writing from students, associates and staff of the MA in Creative Non-fiction

• 17 contributing authors

• Again, versioned artefacts stored privately in the repository

• Focused survey distributed after submission of pieces

Umber Results

• Some authors reticent to store versioned artefacts:

– Archiving early, artistically or otherwise incomplete work;

– Some ‘embarrassed’ by contents of early work.

• Some authors permissive to store versioned artefacts:

– Inadvertent backup tool;– Personal aid, encouragement;– Utilising content from previous work.

Writing Hull Results

• Storing versioned artefacts privately in the repository

• Storing versioned artefacts publically in the repository

• 67% in favor of selecting if and how artefacts are stored

Scholarly Evaluation

• Online survey distributed to research-active staff and postgraduates

• 59 participants

• Questions on perception of CAPRI

Scholarly Evaluation Results

• Storing versioned artefacts privately in the repository

• Storing versioned artefacts publically in the repository

• 90% in favor of selecting if and how artefacts are stored

Conclusion and Reflection

• Further development:

– Improve user perception: provide USP to those who want green and/or gold OA publishing through choice of if /how artefacts are stored• Sharing among selected users within domain?

• Bespoke copyright & usage agreements?

• Integrate with other workflow elements?

– Continue population of repository: encourage repository storage through CBPP by clearly communicating benefits

– Utilise existing tools: explore use of existing repository integration tools (e.g. SWORD) with lessons learnt from CAPRI

Acknowledgements

• JISC for supporting the CBPP project and presentation at this conference

• Project team, and those who helped with the project:

– School of Arts and New Media: Dr. John Whelan, Dr. Tanko Ishaya

– Information Management Group – Chris Awre, Richard Green, Simon Lamb

– Department of English – Professor Martin Goodman and participating authors from Umber and Writing Hull

– Participants and interviewees from the scholarly evaluation

Conclusion

b.kay@hull.ac.uk

linkedin.com/in/bensk