I attended the first day of a two-day CRIG Unconference yesterday. What's CRIG? What's an unconference? Well, CRIG is the Common Repository Interfaces Group, a JISC initiative to develop the community's thinking around repository technology and, in particular, repository APIs. And an unconference is essentially a conference without a pre-determined agenda - delegates develop one dynamically as the conference proceeds....(Remember that I only attended the first day, so my views may be premature)....
[PS: Here omitting a video.]
[T]he day started with a presentation about SWORD - an attempt to use the Atom Publishing Protocol to define a 'deposit' API for repositories. Not that there was anything wrong with the presentation itself (thanks Julie) but it just seemed out of place to me to start an unconference with a scheduled presentation about one particular bit of technology....
Regular readers will know that I have a personal problem with the community's overarching emphasis on the 'R' word (as opposed to simply thinking about surfacing content on the Web) and even more so with the 'IR' words. Look back at our previous blog entries on this subject if you want to know more. This particular meeting sat firmly within that context. About half-way thru the initial brainstorming Paul Walk of UKOLN remarked:
Wouldn't it be great if the outcome of this unconference was that repositories were just wrong?
Well, yes. I think he was joking, btw? Whatever... that sentence more or less captures my thinking on the subject. But there's no way that particular meeting could have come to that conclusion because the 'R' word solution is now so firmly engrained in national policy and direction.
It's a bit like the difference between the NHS funding research into "the treatment and prevention of the common cold" and them funding research into "the treatment and prevention of the common cold using chicken soup". Both will result in some interesting research, discussion, papers, etc. But one focuses on the problem, the other on a particular solution to the problem. What's the essential problem in our case - i.e. what should we be focusing on? Surfacing academic content on the Web in ways that maximise the benefits of open access.
</rant>
Apologies... I've calmed down now....
Despite my negativity I did bring away some positives....A more general willingness to see the Flickrs of this world as good exemplars of what repository-type services should be like. A more widespread recognition that we tend to over complicate our solutions in technical interoperability terms. Some recognition that tagging and full-text indexing are at least as important as metadata (as we tend to use that term in the context of repositories)....
Posted by
Peter Suber at 12/10/2007 10:42:00 AM.
The open access movement:
Putting peer-reviewed scientific and scholarly literature
on the internet. Making it available free of charge and
free of most copyright and licensing restrictions.
Removing the barriers to serious research.
I recommend the OA tracking project (OATP) as the best way to stay on top of new OA developments. You can read the OATP feed on a blog-like web page or subscribe to it by RSS, email, or Twitter. You can also help build the feed by tagging new developments you encounter.
