Dear all,
here is the IFIP Digital Task Force Report which I have just received. Please teat it confidentially. If you have spontaneous comments then please send them to me but they would have to reach me today! Council begins tomorrow.
Best regards Otto
Hi, Otto.
Thanks for distributing the document.
One item should be clarified: the introductory paragraph refers to a "digital library". In paragraph 1. apparently the terminology is changed to an "electronic repository". The equivalence has to be deduced. I see no reason why the term "digital library" cannot be used throughout.
There is not much new in the document compared to what we have already discussed in TC6. Obviously the keys to significant progress are discussion and agreement with Springer.
The only new idea which I found in the document was the idea of password-protected access. This might be the key in dealing with Springer in the sense that perhaps Springer would allow including current conference proceedings in the digital library if it were password protected and so only available to IFIP officers and WG members, for example. At the end of this awkward five-year period, the password could be removed or made freely available.
The real work lies ahead!
With best regards to you all, Harry
Otto Spaniol wrote:
Dear all,
here is the IFIP Digital Task Force Report which I have just received. Please teat it confidentially. If you have spontaneous comments then please send them to me but they would have to reach me today! Council begins tomorrow.
Best regards Otto
Hello Harry,
One item should be clarified: the introductory paragraph refers to a "digital library". In paragraph 1. apparently the terminology is changed to an "electronic repository". The equivalence has to be deduced. I see no reason why the term "digital library" cannot be used throughout.
Thank you very much for your comments. My feeling is that by using the term "electronic repository" it was intended to denote a "simplified digital librar". This is expressed in page 3: "The digital library can be developed incrementally, beginning with a simple repository and later adding more capabilities".
Thus we have three things: a. Electronic archive: For the past events. And also as a backup storage in case that there would be unforeseen problems with the digital library. b. Electronic Repository: A first step towards a *real* digital library. First with limited functionality such as paper abstracts and (whenever possible) extended abstracts. c. Digital library: The final step. The intermediate step b. is intended to speed up the process since we cannot wait four more years (until 2009) which is the validity of the actual Springer contract during which a DL has to be established by Springer. In clear text: Springer could theoretically wait for that until the end of the contract period.
Best regards Otto
-
Harry Rudin -
Otto Spaniol