The Repository Fringe 2009 (Part 3)
Posted by gazjjohnson on 5 August, 2009
Day 2 of the Fringe was more about discussions between the participants, formally and informally.
Round table discussion on impact of mandates
QMU, Edinburgh have had mandate in place Feb 2008. Academics feel a push to research, and especial resistance to OA publishing have been encountered. The discussions went around a lot of points in the hour including the fact that those with mandates are still reporting a low level of compliance with them (approx 25% at best) after a year. The concept of whom should be chasing academics to comply, was felt by the room to be irrelevant – the most important role of the mandate is to affirm the institutions dedication to open access to research publications, and less a picture of attempting to garner 100% compliance.
Round table discussion on data repositories
This was a little above my head but focused on questions of cost of storage, size of data, length of curation and even just what was suitable data to archive
Round table discussion on future of repositories
The focus in this session, looking 5 years ahead. However, discussions quickly bogged down due to some vocal contributions focusing on the issues of the centralisation of author identification and copyright issues. To be honest I felt that this discussion was somewhat blinkered byu the problems of the next few years, rather than really looking ahead to the situation 5 years hence.
Implementing Open Data
This final session was given over to a presentation from US Copyright attorney looking at legal issues around open data and the concept of copyleft. While it had its moments, it was a little difficult to reconcile a session on licensing of material in repositories with an open access ethos.
So was the event worth the 8 hour journey there (and then back again?). Yes for the most part. I certainly got more out of the first day than I did the second. Indeed I could have left at lunch on day 2 and not feel I’d missed anything critical. It would have been nice to have a pre-event meet up the night before day 1, as I was left twiddling my thumbs in a hall of residence. On the other hand the informal arrangements for the following evening of the conference while anarchic did make for an enjoyable evening of discussion. The catering and venue was excellent, and the Wifi worked (eventually).
Would I go next year? Maybe if the programme was comparable. I might hope for more discussion on day one and the presentations spread out across the two days. All the same, a big thanks to the organisers for all their work.