Open Access Reader/Sourcing Papers: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 15:01, 16 March 2014

Evaluation

It is very desirable at this stage to pick one source repository for this data. Doing the aggregation ourselves is out of scope of this project. So which should we choose? Source repository may be evaluated on various metrics:

Comprehensiveness (does it cover all OA publishers? does it intend to?)
Treatment of Metadata (does it collect everything? can it be annotated?)
Quality of API (is it easy to use? does it do everything we need it to do?)
Level of Client Service (will they respond to our requirements?)
Maturity (if things are bad now, are they likely to improve?)
Longevity (is it likely to still be active in 3 years?)

Aggregators

CORE
DOAJ

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+==Evaluation==
-It is very desirable at this stage to pick one source repository for this data. Aggregating publishers is out of scope of this project. So which should we choose? Source repository may be evaluated on various metrics:
+It is very desirable at this stage to pick one source repository for this data. Doing the aggregation ourselves is out of scope of this project. So which should we choose? Source repository may be evaluated on various metrics:
-*Comprehensiveness
+*Comprehensiveness (does it cover all OA publishers? does it intend to?)
-*Treatment of Metadata
+*Treatment of Metadata (does it collect everything? can it be annotated?)
+*Quality of API (is it easy to use? does it do everything we need it to do?)
-*Quality of API
-*Level of Client Service
+*Level of Client Service (will they respond to our requirements?)
+*Maturity (if things are bad now, are they likely to improve?)
-*Capability of Team
+*Longevity (is it likely to still be active in 3 years?)
-*Longevity
+==Aggregators==
+*[http://core.kmi.open.ac.uk/intro/api CORE]
+*[http://doaj.org/faq#metadata DOAJ]