Rebecca Sutton Koeser bio photo

Rebecca Sutton Koeser

Lead Developer at Princeton University Center for Digital Humanities, PhD in English Literature.

Twitter LinkedIn Github ORCID iD Keybase Humanities Commons

Clifford Lynch gave the closing plenary at Open Repositories 2011, and he talked about where we are now with repositories, about a decade in.

Lynch said that Institional Repositories are growing in tandem with the Open Access conversations, and both of them raise questions - for example, what are the roles and responsibilities of the institution to curate reasearch data and scholarly work? He warned about the danger of confusing mechanism with policy: some people create IRs with no plan for content or policy; and he raised the question whether Institutional Repositories are always the right answer– when are discipline-specific or cross-institutional repositories a better fit? In particular, Lynch emphasized that repositories can act as a focal point for policy conversations - but also for collaboration. He syas that repositories have changed the landscape in real ways.

Then, Lynch transitioned to the “open questions” part of his talk, touching on the following:

  • bizarre practices with name authority
  • what’s the difference between an IR and a digital libraries collection? (common platforms are used for both; I think someone responded on twitter that the difference is who does the curation)
  • what is or should be the relationship between IR and learning management systems? He commented that it us unusual now to have export, archive, or communication between such systems; he mentioned in particular capturing lectures.
  • Where does the IR sit or belong in the process of research? At what point should something go in? Does it make sense to think about the repository as a workspace? What about large datasets, or data that is too large to back up or transmit?
  • A lot of scholarship is now tied up in complex software; in many cases, the data is impossible to understand or reuse without the software; research results are dependend on complicated software - which raises interesting questions with regard to versions of the software, provenance, etc. (talk about embedded assumptions in your research!). Orphan software is only going to increase; how do we preserve it?
  • What about retiring faculty? How do we migrate their collected research data into the IR?