1 Introduction
close this book View the PDF document Extending Greenstone for Institutional Repositories : David Bainbridge, Wendy Osborn, Ian H. Witten, David M. Nichols
View the document 2 Background
View the document 3 Example of Operation
Open this folder and view contents 4 Implementation
View the document 5 Extended example: emulating DSpace
View the document 6 Discussion
View the document 7 Conclusion
View the document References

6   Discussion

We now discuss the context into which this work fits by summarizing the key points to software solutions being used as institutional repositories.

DSpace is specifically designed as an institutional repository. It is a popular choice by organizations to provide a digital repository that harnesses the output of their institution. It requires an IT specialist to install, which is commensurate with the typical organizational environment in which it is used. Some customization is possible but because runtime functionality is locked up in the server it is ostensibly a fixed workflow from a librarian’s perspective. Full text indexing is possible, but only limited to a small number of native file formats.

GNU EPrints [8 is another popular choice with over 200 known installations worldwide. Rather than spanning an entire organization, many EPrints installations are deployed in a niche role by an entity within the organization, although it can and is deployed in a wider context. It is easy to install and it includes configuration files that control the metadata in use and the document types supported. Ironically enough, it has been the use by niche disciplines that has driven the need to support different metadata sets rather than the unified “one shoe fits all” approach seen in DSpace; however, it lacks the notation of communities and collections, which enables a repository to be used in different ways across an organization. EPrints supports full text indexing.

Fez [3] is an emerging software solution for institutional repository use. In beta form at the time of writing, its notion of generality and configurability is more ambitious than the above two systems. It is built on top of Fedora, and is exactly the sort of development the framework is aimed at. Fez utilizes the rich complexity of the Fedora framework to deliver a system tailored for institutional repository use. It includes the concept of communities and collections, configurable workflow and metadata. While Fedora can handle full text indexing, this ability is not exposed through Fez, and there are some compatibility issues with connecting Fez with a framework that is still itself under development.