The Stanford Digital Repository in the Digital Library Ecosystem
Katherine Kott, Stanford University
RDAP Institutional Repository Panel
Denver, CO
March 31, 2011
Framing the IR Discussion
• Ed Summers (LoC) adapted Ranganathan’s five laws– Repository objects are for use– Every reader his/her repository object– Every repository object its reader– Save the time of the reader [service?]– The repository is a growing organism
First Generation Repository Development
• Violated several laws– Heavyweight requirements for depositors did
not scale (time intensive)– Difficult to return objects to depositors in
“native” state (difficult to enable use, reuse)– Monolithic design prohibited adjustment
without total redesign (no capacity for organic growth)
SDR 2.0 Infrastructure
• Support a “growing organism” (scalable)• Lower barrier to deposit
– Save the time of the [depositor]
• Base development path/priorities on use cases– Repository objects are for use– Every reader his or her repository object– Every repository object its reader
The IR within the Digital Library Ecosystem
Microservices in the Ecosystem
Actual Use Cases/Diverse Content
• IR content– ETDs– Science data– Conference proceedings– Archival collections (including digital forensics lab
output)
• Library content (curated collections)– Google books– EEMs
ETDs
Technical Environment
• Fedora for DOR and SDR• Microservices robots performing workflow
tasks• “Hydra” user interface development
– Blacklight– Solr
What about Standards?
• Compliant with OAIS reference model• JHOVE• BagIt• Premis (lite)
