We did have plans of a repository certification few years ago. This is quite a dragging process and we do not have the man power to carry it out. We did carry out a pre-study 2 years where we compared the German and Australian concepts and rules for certification of repository servers. After that has nothing happened here in Sweden in this area as far as I am aware.

Kind regards
Uwe

On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 7:37 PM, Filipe Correia <fcorreia@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello Uwe,

Thank you for your reply!
Your scenario is indeed one I can relate to. Do you have any plans for
repository certification, on a long-term preservation perspective? The
preservation checklist I've mentioned appears to me as not being
entirely compatible with the use of a repository on a documents
production phase, rather only on a phase when all documents are
defined for "permanent" preservation.

Thanks,
Filipe Correia

On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 1:08 PM, Uwe Klosa <uwe.klosa@gmail.com> wrote:
> In DiVA we're using Fedora as an repository for two purposes. The first one
> is to archive publication metadata and files. The second one is two support
> a publication workflow for different types of publications. We do have
> mainly a publication workflow for doctoral theses where the digital object
> is the original thesis. Furthermore the system is used by an Open Access
> journal where also the digital objects are the orignals.
>
> I think there have been discussions to use Fedora behind a CMS. But I do not
> know if there is one out there.
>
> Regards
> Uwe Klosa
>
> On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 9:07 PM, Filipe Correia <fcorreia@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Fedora Commons community,
>>
>> We are currently studying the best approach for an institutional
>> repository using fedora, but are finding some difficulties.
>>
>> It's easy to find fedora case studies on the Web, but our scenario is
>> somewhat different from all the others we are finding, even though we
>> find it hard to believe we are the firsts with such a use case.
>>
>> Let me explain. We are trying to address two main concerns:
>>  - Nowadays, all of our new documents are digital ones --- even if
>> they are paper documents, they are turned into a digital form when
>> they enter our institution. All of these documents are currently
>> stored on a very archaic repository, which doesn't provide us with the
>> control access we would like, doesn't properly handle unique object
>> identification, and doesn't really scale to a much larger number of
>> files.
>>  - The long term preservation of these objects hasn't really been
>> thought out before, but we want to start taking it into account.
>>
>> So, our thoughts were to start using fedora, and ingesting digital
>> objects from the moment they appear on the organization. Our document
>> management system (which handles the document workflow) would make use
>> of the underlying fedora infrastructure by maintaining references to
>> the appropriate digital objects. Right on the moment our digital
>> objects were "born" they wouldn't have much associated metadata, but
>> it would grow as the object would be further used, throughout the
>> organization.
>>
>> At the same time, taking our long term preservation concerns into
>> account, we have been looking at the OAIS model and at this repository
>> certification checklist: http://bibpurl.oclc.org/web/16712
>> These sound to us as very wise advises but, at the same time, poses some
>> doubts:
>>  - For certification purposes, the repository would have to maintain
>> *only* long-term-preservation objects, but if we ingest "newborn"
>> objects, that will not be the case. Only later the objects will be
>> evaluated and considered worthy of long-term preservation, or not ---
>> in which case they can be discarded.
>>  - For our day to day administrative activities it makes perfect sense
>> to use a repository since the moment the document is created...  does
>> this mean we will have to have a second repository to which to copy
>> the digital objects when the time comes? (this seems silly to us... Is
>> it?)
>>
>>
>> If someone has faced a similar scenario, we would really love to hear
>> your take on this matter. It seems to us that repository models are
>> being thought out mainly for end-of-the-line archiving (that is, when
>> they have served their main administrative purposes), but we think it
>> could be very useful to use them sooner on the document life-cycle.
>>
>>
>> Thank you in advance!
>>
>> Regards,
>> Filipe Correia
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's
>> challenge
>> Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great
>> prizes
>> Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the
>> world
>> http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
>> _______________________________________________
>> Fedora-commons-users mailing list
>> Fedora-commons-users@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fedora-commons-users
>
>