- Finished growth comparison chart. - Tweaked other two charts. - Added log scale stub files. - Added figures to main document. - Rewrote pilot implementation and Te Tumu sections.

nigel.stanger / Publications

Browse code - Finished growth comparison chart. - Tweaked other two charts. - Added log scale stub files. - Added figures to main document. - Rewrote pilot implementation and Te Tumu sections. OCLC_2007
1 parent 81b9843 commit c45077aa36b20198e1b33cb8e9bdb21e09d385cd nstanger authored on 21 Sep 2006

Patch

Showing 7 changed files

Ignore Space Show notes View Makefile
.SUFFIXES: .eps .dvi .ps .bbl .bib .tex .plo .tif .pdf SHELL=/bin/sh lineplot = ploticus -eps -tightcrop -o $(1).eps lineplot.plo infile=$(2) \ title=$(3) ytitle=$(4) ymin=$(5) ymax=$(6); \ epstopdf $(1).eps; \ rm -f $(1).eps GRAPHICS:=otago_growth.pdf otago_items.pdf growth_comparison.pdf OCLC.pdf: OCLC.tex OCLC.bib $(GRAPHICS) pdflatex $< bibtex $* pdflatex $< pdflatex $< otago_growth.pdf: otago_growth.plo ploticus -eps -croprel 0,0.2,0.7,0 -o $.eps $< epstopdf $.eps rm -f $.eps otago_items.pdf: otago_items.plo ploticus -eps -croprel 0.2,0,0,0 -o $.eps $< epstopdf $.eps rm -f $.eps growth_comparison.plo: chunk_logstubs chunk_logtics clean: rm -f .aux .bbl .blg .log .dvi .ps OCLC.pdf %.pdf: %.plo ploticus -eps -tightcrop -o $.eps $< epstopdf $.eps rm -f $.eps %.pdf: %.svg inkscape --file=$< --export-text-to-path --without-gui --export-eps=$.eps ps2eps --ignoreBB --nohires --loose --gsbbox < $.eps \| ps2pdf -dEPSCrop - $@ rm -f $.eps %.pdf: %.ps ps2pdf -dNOCACHE $< $@ %.ps: %.dvi dvips -o $@ $< %.dvi: %.tex latex $< latex $< %.eps: %.tif convert $< $@ .SUFFIXES: .eps .dvi .ps .bbl .bib .tex .plo .tif .pdf SHELL=/bin/sh lineplot = ploticus -eps -tightcrop -o $(1).eps lineplot.plo infile=$(2) \ title=$(3) ytitle=$(4) ymin=$(5) ymax=$(6); \ epstopdf $(1).eps; \ rm -f $(1).eps GRAPHICS:=otago_growth.pdf otago_items.pdf growth_comparison.pdf OCLC.pdf: OCLC.tex OCLC.bib $(GRAPHICS) pdflatex $< bibtex $* pdflatex $< pdflatex $< # jpeg_detail.png: ImageGeneration-full.png # convert -crop 180x95+150+95 $< $@ # # overlay_detail.png: PointOverlay-full.png # convert -crop 180x95+150+95 $< $@ otago_growth.pdf: otago_growth.plo ploticus -eps -croprel 0,0.1,0.6,0 -o $.eps $< epstopdf $.eps rm -f $.eps %.pdf: %.plo ploticus -eps -tightcrop -o $.eps $< epstopdf $.eps rm -f $.eps # data_generation_time.pdf: d_data_generation_time.txt lineplot.plo # $(call lineplot,$,$<,'Data Generation Time','Average time to generate data at server (s)',0.001,2000) # # page_load_time.pdf: d_page_load_time.txt lineplot.plo # $(call lineplot,$,$<,'Map Display Time','Average time to display map at client (s)',0.001,2000) # # combined_time.pdf: d_combined_time.txt lineplot.plo # $(call lineplot,$,$<,'Combined Page Load Time','Average time to generate data and display map (s)',0.001,2000) # # real_memory.pdf: d_real_memory.txt lineplot.plo # $(call lineplot,$,$<,'Real Memory Usage','Browser real memory size (MB)',10,1200) # # virtual_memory.pdf: d_virtual_memory.txt lineplot.plo # $(call lineplot,$,$<,'Virtual Memory Usage','Browser virtual memory size (MB)',10,1200) clean: rm -f .aux .bbl .blg .log .dvi .ps OCLC.pdf %.pdf: %.svg inkscape --file=$< --export-text-to-path --without-gui --export-eps=$.eps ps2eps --ignoreBB --nohires --loose --gsbbox < $.eps \| ps2pdf -dEPSCrop - $@ rm -f $.eps %.pdf: %.ps ps2pdf -dNOCACHE $< $@ %.ps: %.dvi dvips -o $@ $< %.dvi: %.tex latex $< latex $< %.eps: %.tif convert $< $@

Ignore Space Show notes View

Makefile

.SUFFIXES: .eps .dvi .ps .bbl .bib .tex .plo .tif .pdf

SHELL=/bin/sh

lineplot = ploticus -eps -tightcrop -o $(1).eps lineplot.plo infile=$(2) \
	title=$(3) ytitle=$(4) ymin=$(5) ymax=$(6); \
	epstopdf $(1).eps; \
	rm -f $(1).eps

GRAPHICS:=otago_growth.pdf otago_items.pdf growth_comparison.pdf

OCLC.pdf: OCLC.tex OCLC.bib $(GRAPHICS)
	pdflatex $<
	bibtex $*
	pdflatex $<
	pdflatex $<

otago_growth.pdf: otago_growth.plo
	ploticus -eps -croprel 0,0.2,0.7,0 -o $*.eps $<
	epstopdf $*.eps
	rm -f $*.eps

otago_items.pdf: otago_items.plo
	ploticus -eps -croprel 0.2,0,0,0 -o $*.eps $<
	epstopdf $*.eps
	rm -f $*.eps

growth_comparison.plo: chunk_logstubs chunk_logtics

clean:
	rm -f *.aux *.bbl *.blg *.log *.dvi *.ps OCLC.pdf

%.pdf: %.plo
	ploticus -eps -tightcrop -o $*.eps $<
	epstopdf $*.eps
	rm -f $*.eps

%.pdf: %.svg
	inkscape --file=$< --export-text-to-path --without-gui --export-eps=$*.eps
	ps2eps --ignoreBB --nohires --loose --gsbbox < $*.eps | ps2pdf -dEPSCrop - $@
	rm -f $*.eps

%.pdf: %.ps
	ps2pdf -dNOCACHE $< $@

%.ps: %.dvi
	dvips -o $@ $<

%.dvi: %.tex
	latex $<
	latex $<

%.eps: %.tif
	convert $< $@

.SUFFIXES: .eps .dvi .ps .bbl .bib .tex .plo .tif .pdf

SHELL=/bin/sh

lineplot = ploticus -eps -tightcrop -o $(1).eps lineplot.plo infile=$(2) \
	title=$(3) ytitle=$(4) ymin=$(5) ymax=$(6); \
	epstopdf $(1).eps; \
	rm -f $(1).eps

GRAPHICS:=otago_growth.pdf otago_items.pdf growth_comparison.pdf

OCLC.pdf: OCLC.tex OCLC.bib $(GRAPHICS)
	pdflatex $<
	bibtex $*
	pdflatex $<
	pdflatex $<

# jpeg_detail.png: ImageGeneration-full.png
# 	convert -crop 180x95+150+95 $< $@
# 
# overlay_detail.png: PointOverlay-full.png
# 	convert -crop 180x95+150+95 $< $@

otago_growth.pdf: otago_growth.plo
	ploticus -eps -croprel 0,0.1,0.6,0 -o $*.eps $<
	epstopdf $*.eps
	rm -f $*.eps

%.pdf: %.plo
	ploticus -eps -tightcrop -o $*.eps $<
	epstopdf $*.eps
	rm -f $*.eps

# data_generation_time.pdf: d_data_generation_time.txt lineplot.plo
# 	$(call lineplot,$*,$<,'Data Generation Time','Average time to generate data at server (s)',0.001,2000)
# 
# page_load_time.pdf: d_page_load_time.txt lineplot.plo
# 	$(call lineplot,$*,$<,'Map Display Time','Average time to display map at client (s)',0.001,2000)
# 
# combined_time.pdf: d_combined_time.txt lineplot.plo
# 	$(call lineplot,$*,$<,'Combined Page Load Time','Average time to generate data and display map (s)',0.001,2000)
# 
# real_memory.pdf: d_real_memory.txt lineplot.plo
# 	$(call lineplot,$*,$<,'Real Memory Usage','Browser real memory size (MB)',10,1200)
# 
# virtual_memory.pdf: d_virtual_memory.txt lineplot.plo
# 	$(call lineplot,$*,$<,'Virtual Memory Usage','Browser virtual memory size (MB)',10,1200)

clean:
	rm -f *.aux *.bbl *.blg *.log *.dvi *.ps OCLC.pdf

%.pdf: %.svg
	inkscape --file=$< --export-text-to-path --without-gui --export-eps=$*.eps
	ps2eps --ignoreBB --nohires --loose --gsbbox < $*.eps | ps2pdf -dEPSCrop - $@
	rm -f $*.eps

%.pdf: %.ps
	ps2pdf -dNOCACHE $< $@

%.ps: %.dvi
	dvips -o $@ $<

%.dvi: %.tex
	latex $<
	latex $<

%.eps: %.tif
	convert $< $@

Ignore Space Show notes View OCLC.tex
\documentclass[12pt,pdftex,a4paper,titlepage]{article} \usepackage[T1]{fontenc} \usepackage{textcomp} \usepackage{lmodern} \usepackage{graphicx} \usepackage[margin=1in]{geometry} \usepackage{pifont} \usepackage[dcucite]{harvard} \usepackage{url} \title{Building institutional repositories on a shoestring} \author{Nigel Stanger} \date{University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand} \begin{document} \maketitle \bibliographystyle{dcu} \begin{abstract} \textbf{Purpose} --- To demonstrate the ease of implementing digital institutional repositories. \noindent\textbf{Design/methodology/approach} --- Three separate repositories were implemented at the University of Otago over a six month period, each with a different focus and different needs. The first repository was implemented as a pilot, and is now a fully-functional system. The other two repositories were implemented from the ground up as fully-functional systems. \noindent\textbf{Findings} --- Implementing an effective digital repository requires suprisingly few resources. The first Otago repository was implemented by a team of four people in only ten days, running on cheap commodity hardware and free open source software. \noindent\textbf{Practical implications} --- xxx \noindent\textbf{Originality/value} --- xxx \end{abstract} \section{Introduction} Digital institutional repositories have become a hot topic over the last few years, and many institutions around the world are now actively working towards implementing them. In this article we discuss how low cost yet fully functional digital institutional repositories (IRs) can be set up in a very short time frame. We reflect on the lessons learned while implementing three different repositories at the University of Otago and suggest some best practices for implementing an IR. We also discuss the issues that must be considered when moving from a small-scale pilot implementation to a full roll-out. Interest in institutional repositories at the University of Otago was sparked by the release of the New Zealand Digital Strategy by the New Zealand government in May 2005. The strategy aims to ensure that ``New Zealand is a world leader in using information and technology to realise our economic, environmental, social and cultural goals'' \cite{NZG-2005-digital_strategy}. In parallel with this, the National Library of New Zealand set up an expert working party with representatives from across the research sector to investigate the feasibility of establishing a national institutional repository for New Zealand's research outputs \cite{Rank-J-2005-feasibility}. The National Library is fostering the creation and launch of a work programme to improve access to New Zealand's research outputs, by collaborating with institutions to stimulate the set-up of research repositories. In May 2005, two senior University of Otago staff undertook a study tour of Digital Challenges facing universities in the United States. Their report provided the immediate impetus for the first IR pilot in Otago's School of Business. Project work began on 7 November 2005, with the following goals: \begin{itemize} \item To establish a proof of concept demonstrator for storing and making available as ``open access'', digital research publications in the School of Business. \item To evaluate the potential of the demonstrator for adoption by the wider Otago University research community. \item To connect the School of Business with the global research community, in line with the feasibility study and recommended actions for a national repositories framework for New Zealand's research outputs \cite{Rank-J-2005-feasibility}. \end{itemize} \section{Implementation of the first pilot} The GNU EPrints repository management software was chosen for the pilot repository because it was widely used, well-supported, inexpensive and would not lock the School into specific technologies or vendors \cite{Sale-A-2005-NZIRW}. The development team also had prior experience with the software. A rapid prototyping methodology was adopted, emphasising quick releases of visible results with multiple iterations, in order to create interest in the project at an early stage, and enable a positive feedback cycle. A sandbox was used to test entries and entry formats before the material went live. The pilot IR was fully implemented within ten days of assembling the project team, with most of this time spent tweaking the look and feel of the web site and collecting content. This outcome was possible because of the establishment of a very clear brief to ``prove the concept'', rather than taking on a large scale project that would involve many different disciplines, researchers and research outputs from the outset. Early decisions were made to restrict the content and content domain used for the pilot, in order to speed the collection process and minimise the possibility of requirement ``creep''. Meetings were kept to a minimum and policy and procedural issues that required institutional decisions were noted as work progressed, rather than tackled head on. The project was widely publicised within the School and Heads of Departments were consulted to ensure top-level buy-in. This approach produced immediate results and the repository was quickly populated with a range of working/discussion papers, conference items, journal articles and theses. There was no cost associated with the open access software community associated with GNU EPrints, and from a technical point of view the project was wonderfully straightforward. The School of Business IR\footnote{\url{http://eprints.otago.ac.nz/}} was deployed on a spare mid-range server running FreeBSD, which meant that hardware and software costs were essentially nil. In other words, if you happen to have some spare hardware lying around, you can set up an initial repository very cheaply, and then expand it later. A minimalist approach was taken with regard to gathering potential content; partly because of the prototypical nature of the project, and partly because material in the hand is worth more than a million promises of what authors suggest they ``can'' provide if given sufficient time. New publications are always being created, and content acquisition is a moving target that has to be effectively managed. Once some basic content acquisition and data entry protocols were put in place, an incremental methodology was adopted. Content was strictly limited to voluntary contributions in PDF format from colleagues in the School of Business, but with no constraint on the type of output. As of mid-September 2006, the IR contains 327 documents covering a wide range of topics and document types, and these are added to as new content is acquired. A more systematic approach to content collection is currently being considered. It is remarkable what can be achieved by a small, dedicated, knowledgeable and enthusiastic implementation team. As with any project, the right mix of technical and project management skills is crucial in making things happen. The project team comprised the School's Research Development Coordinator (project management and evangelism), an Information Science lecturer (software implementation), the School's IT manager (hardware and deployment) and two senior students (research, content acquisition and data entry). Oversight was provided by a standing committee comprising representatives from Information Technology Services, the University Library and the School of Business. \section{Impact of the pilot} The initial response to the pilot repository seemed spectacular, with over 18,000 downloads recorded within the first three months, from a very wide range of different countries. This was considerably more than several similar repositories elsewhere in the world and excited considerable interest from both inside and outside the University. It was therefore somewhat disheartening to discover in April 2006 that the hit rates were in fact over-inflated by a factor of about five. This was due to an undocumented assumption in the Tasmania statistics generating software \cite{Sale-A-2006-stats} that resulted in hits being counted more than once if the statistics were gathered more often than once per day. (The lesson here is to always be wary of computers bearing wonderful news!) Despite this, hit rates for the Otago IR are still healthy, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig-otago-growth}. Interestingly, the repository attracts many more abstract views than downloads. An informal analysis of hit rates for five other repositories around the world shows that the same is true for some of them, while for others the opposite occurs (many more downloads than abstract views). Further investigation is needed to determine why this variation occurs. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[scale=0.79]{otago_growth} \caption{Total monthly hit rates (bar chart, left axis) and number of items (line chart, right axis) for the Otago repository.} \label{fig-otago-growth} \end{figure} Of particular interest is that hit rates on the Otago IR have grown at a much more rapid rate than the other repositories were examined, especially when time since launch is taken into account. As can be seen in Figure~\ref{fig-growth-comparison}, total traffic to the Otago IR has grown much more rapidly during its early months than any of the other repositories, including some that have existed for much longer. Clearly this is a very interesting development, and a research project is currently underway to investigate the possible reasons for this. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[scale=0.8]{growth_comparison} \caption{Comparison of traffic growth across eight EPrints repositories.} \label{fig-growth-comparison} \end{figure} One exciting outcome of the IR deployment has been the ability to make publicly available material that might otherwise be inaccessible. For example, Figure~\ref{fig-item-types} shows that about two thirds of the items in the Otago IR are items that might not otherwise be readily accessible, such as theses, dissertations, and various working and discussion papers. Indeed, the top ten downloaded items as of mid-September comprise five departmental working papers, two conference papers, one journal paper, one thesis and one research report, in essentially that order. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[scale=0.8]{otago_items} \caption{Distribution of item types in the Otago repository.} \label{fig-item-types} \end{figure} The pilot implementation was clearly a success. Indeed, it was so successful that the ``pilot'' status was dropped in mid-May, and it is now the official IR for Otago's School of Business. The lessons learned from this experience have since been applied to two other IRs at Otago, with potentially more to come. \section{The second IR: EPrints Te Tumu} The success of the pilot resulted in considerable interest throughout the University community. In early 2006, Te Tumu, the University's School of Maori, Pacific \& Indigenous Studies, expressed an interest in implementing an IR for their specific needs. They were particularly interested in the use of an IR as a means of disseminating research and other work, as there are relatively few ``official'' outlets for their discipline. Drawing on experiences from the pilot, the Te Tumu IR\footnote{\url{http://eprintstetumu.otago.ac.nz/}} was implemented by a single person in about a month, and was officially launched on May 3 2006, making it the first IR for indigenous studies in New Zealand (and possibly the world). Response to the repository has been positive, with over 2,500 downloads from 46 different countries during its first four and half months (the repository currently contains about 30 items). \section{Issues that arose} [all of these to be expanded] \begin{itemize} \item Copyright: who owns it, perception vs.\ reality. \item Data standards: metadata, interoperability with Library systems, etc. \item Data entry: trained vs.\ non-trained users, editorial control. \item Content acquisition: voluntary vs.\ mandatory. \item Types of content: quality vs.\ quantity, currency vs.\ archival, media types, non-digital material, etc. \end{itemize} \section{Rollout to the wider University} The University is currently in the process of determining whether to proceed with a full implementation of an IR for the University. [decision due any time now] If such a rollout occurs, the repository will become the responsibility of the University Library, which is a logical place for such a resource to be managed. The Library has expressed strong support for going ahead with a wider rollout. Regardless of whether this occurs, the School of Business has committed to continuing with the existing IR. Further issues that need to be considered in this context: \begin{itemize} \item Management: library vs.\ IT, oversight, position within the University. \item Integration: single monolithic repository vs.\ many small distributed repositories (we are already heading in the direction of the second model); integration with existing information systems. \item Data entry: authors (self-archiving) vs.\ library staff. \item others... \end{itemize} \section{Looking ahead: Community repositories} An exciting consequence of our work on the School of Business pilot has been an approach from various communities throughout New Zealand to set up repositories of historical material relating to their community. The first of these was Cardrona\footnote{\url{http://cardrona.eprints.otago.ac.nz/}}, a small Central Otago community with a long and varied history. We recently launched the Cardrona Community Repository, which is the first community repository in New Zealand [possibly the world?]. Digital repositories offer communities a wonderful opportunity to preserve their historical and cultural information, and to disseminate it to a much wider audience than would normally be possible. \section{Conclusions etc.} [to come later] \bibliography{OCLC} \end{document} \documentclass[12pt,pdftex,a4paper,titlepage]{article} \usepackage[T1]{fontenc} \usepackage{textcomp} \usepackage{lmodern} \usepackage{graphicx} \usepackage[margin=1in]{geometry} \usepackage{pifont} \usepackage[dcucite]{harvard} \usepackage{url} \title{Building institutional repositories on a shoestring} \author{Nigel Stanger} \date{University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand} \begin{document} \maketitle \bibliographystyle{dcu} \begin{abstract} \textbf{Purpose} --- To demonstrate the ease of implementing digital institutional repositories. \noindent\textbf{Design/methodology/approach} --- Three separate repositories were implemented at the University of Otago over a six month period, each with a different focus and different needs. The first repository was implemented as a pilot, and is now a fully-functional system. The other two repositories were implemented from the ground up as fully-functional systems. \noindent\textbf{Findings} --- Implementing an effective digital repository requires suprisingly few resources. The first Otago repository was implemented by a team of four people in only ten days, running on cheap commodity hardware and free open source software. \noindent\textbf{Practical implications} --- xxx \noindent\textbf{Originality/value} --- xxx \end{abstract} \section{Introduction} Digital institutional repositories have become a hot topic over the last few years, and many institutions around the world are now considering or actively working towards implementing them. In this article we discuss how low cost yet fully functional digital institutional repositories (IRs) can be set up in a very short time frame. We reflect on the lessons learned while implementing three different repositories at the University of Otago and suggest some best practices for implementing an IR. We also discuss the issues that must be considered when moving from a small-scale pilot implementation to a full roll-out. % \section{Background} Interest in institutional repositories at the University of Otago was sparked by the release of the New Zealand Digital Strategy by the New Zealand government in May 2005. The strategy has the stated goal of ``ensuring New Zealand is a world leader in using information and technology to realise our economic, environmental, social and cultural goals'' \cite{NZG-2005-digital_strategy}. In parallel with this, the National Library of New Zealand set up an expert working party with representatives from across the research sector to investigate the feasibility of establishing a national institutional repository for New Zealand's research outputs \cite{Rank-J-2005-feasibility}. The National Library is fostering the creation and launch of a work programme to improve access to New Zealand's research outputs, by collaborating with institutions to stimulate the set-up of research repositories. In May 2005, two senior University of Otago staff undertook a study tour of Digital Challenges facing universities in the United States. Their report provided the immediate impetus for the first IR pilot in Otago's School of Business. Project work began on 7 November 2005, with the following goals: \begin{itemize} \item To establish a proof of concept demonstrator for storing and making available as ``open access'', digital research publications in the School of Business. \item To evaluate the potential of the demonstrator for adoption by the wider Otago University research community. \item To connect the School of Business with the global research community, in line with the feasibility study and recommended actions for a national repositories framework for New Zealand's research outputs \cite{Rank-J-2005-feasibility}. \end{itemize} \section{Implementation of the first pilot} The GNU EPrints repository management software was chosen because it was widely used, well-supported, inexpensive and would not lock us into specific technologies or vendors \cite{Sale-A-2005-NZIRW}. The development team also had prior experience with the software. A rapid prototyping methodology was adopted, emphasising quick releases of visible results with multiple iterations, in order to create interest in the project at an early stage, and enable a positive feedback cycle. A sandbox was used to test entries and entry formats before the material went live. The pilot IR was fully implemented within ten days of assembling the project team. This outcome was possible because of the establishment of a very clear brief to ``prove the concept'', rather than taking on a large scale project that would involve many different disciplines, researchers and research outputs from the outset. Early decisions were made to restrict the content and content domain used for the pilot, in order to speed the collection process and minimise the possibility of requirement ``creep''. Meetings were kept to a minimum and policy and procedural issues that required institutional decisions were noted as work progressed, rather than tackled head on. The project was widely publicised within the School and Heads of Departments were consulted to ensure top-level buy-in. This approach produced immediate results and the repository was quickly populated with a range of working/discussion papers, conference items, journal articles and theses. There was no cost associated with the open access software community associated with GNU EPrints, and from a technical point of view the project was wonderfully straightforward. The School of Business IR\footnote{\url{http://eprints.otago.ac.nz/}} was deployed on a spare mid-range server running FreeBSD, which meant that hardware and software costs were essentially nil. In other words, if you happen to have some spare hardware lying around, you can set up an initial repository very cheaply, and then expand it later. A minimalist approach was taken with regard to gathering potential content; partly because of the prototypical nature of the project, and partly because material in the hand is worth more than a million promises of what authors suggest they ``can'' provide if given sufficient time. New publications are always being created, and content acquisition is a moving target that has to be effectively managed. Once some basic content acquisition and data entry protocols were put in place, an incremental methodology was adopted. Content was strictly limited to voluntary contributions in PDF format from colleagues in the School of Business, but with no constraint on the type of output. As of mid-September 2006, the IR contains 327 documents covering a wide range of topics and document types, and these are added to as new content is acquired. A more systematic approach to content collection is currently being considered. It is remarkable what can be achieved by a small, dedicated, knowledgeable and enthusiastic implementation team. As with any project, the right mix of technical and project management skills is crucial in making things happen. The project team comprised the School's Research Development Coordinator (project management and evangelism), an Information Science lecturer (software implementation), the School's IT manager (hardware and deployment) and two senior students (research, content acquisition and data entry). Oversight was provided by a standing committee comprising representatives from the Information Technology Services Division, the University Library and the School of Business. \section{Impact of the pilot} The initial response to the pilot repository seemed spectacular, with over 18,000 downloads recorded within the first three months. This was considerably more than similar IRs elsewhere in the world and excited considerable interest from both inside and outside the University. It was therefore somewhat disheartening to discover in April 2006 that the download counts were in fact over-inflated by a factor of about five. This was due to an undocumented assumption in the Tasmania statistics generating software \cite{Sale-A-2006-stats} that resulted in downloads being counted more than once if the statistics were calculated more often than once per day. (The lesson here is to always be wary of computers bearing good news!) Despite this setback, the download rates for the IR are still comparatively higher than several other similar repositories, especially when time since launch is taken into account. As of mid-September 2006 [more detail to come as I have yet to collate some of the data] Clearly this is a very interesting development, and a research project is currently underway to investigate the possible reasons behind this. One exciting outcome of the IR deployment has been the ability to make publicly available material that might otherwise be inaccessible. For example, over two thirds of the items in the repository are \section{The second IR: EPrints Te Tumu} The success of the first pilot produced considerable interest throughout the University community. We were approached in early 2006 by Te Tumu, the University's School of Maori, Pacific \& Indigenous Studies, to set up an IR for their specific needs. They were particularly interested in the use of an IR as a means of disseminating research and other work, as there are relatively fewer ``official'' outlets for such work in their discipline. Drawing on our experiences with the first pilot, the Te Tumu repository\footnote{\url{http://eprintstetumu.otago.ac.nz/}} was implemented by a single person in about a month, and was officially launched on May 3 2006, making it the first IR for indigenous studies in New Zealand [possibly the world]. Response to the repository has been positive, with nearly 400 downloads in the first month (the repository currently contains about 20 items). \section{Issues that arose} [all of these to be expanded] \begin{itemize} \item Copyright: who owns it, perception vs.\ reality. \item Data standards: metadata, interoperability with Library systems, etc. \item Data entry: trained vs.\ non-trained users, editorial control. \item Content acquisition: voluntary vs.\ mandatory. \item Types of content: quality vs.\ quantity, currency vs.\ archival, media types, non-digital material, etc. \end{itemize} \section{Rollout to the wider University} The University is currently in the process of determining whether to proceed with a full implementation of an IR for the University. [decision due any time now] If such a rollout occurs, the repository will become the responsibility of the University Library, which is a logical place for such a resource to be managed. The Library has expressed strong support for going ahead with a wider rollout. Regardless of whether this occurs, the School of Business has committed to continuing with the existing IR. Further issues that need to be considered in this context: \begin{itemize} \item Management: library vs.\ IT, oversight, position within the University. \item Integration: single monolithic repository vs.\ many small distributed repositories (we are already heading in the direction of the second model); integration with existing information systems. \item Data entry: authors (self-archiving) vs.\ library staff. \item others... \end{itemize} \section{Looking ahead: Community repositories} An exciting consequence of our work on the School of Business pilot has been an approach from various communities throughout New Zealand to set up repositories of historical material relating to their community. The first of these was Cardrona\footnote{\url{http://cardrona.eprints.otago.ac.nz/}}, a small Central Otago community with a long and varied history. We recently launched the Cardrona Community Repository, which is the first community repository in New Zealand [possibly the world?]. Digital repositories offer communities a wonderful opportunity to preserve their historical and cultural information, and to disseminate it to a much wider audience than would normally be possible. \section{Conclusions etc.} [to come later] \bibliography{OCLC} \end{document}

Ignore Space Show notes View

OCLC.tex

\documentclass[12pt,pdftex,a4paper,titlepage]{article}

\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
\usepackage{textcomp}
\usepackage{lmodern}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage[margin=1in]{geometry}
\usepackage{pifont}
\usepackage[dcucite]{harvard}
\usepackage{url}

\title{Building institutional repositories on a shoestring}
\author{Nigel Stanger}
\date{University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand}

\begin{document}

\maketitle

\bibliographystyle{dcu}

\begin{abstract}
\textbf{Purpose} --- To demonstrate the ease of implementing digital institutional repositories.

\noindent\textbf{Design/methodology/approach} --- Three separate repositories were implemented at the University of Otago over a six month period, each with a different focus and different needs. The first repository was implemented as a pilot, and is now a fully-functional system. The other two repositories were implemented from the ground up as fully-functional systems.

\noindent\textbf{Findings} --- Implementing an effective digital repository requires suprisingly few resources. The first Otago repository was implemented by a team of four people in only ten days, running on cheap commodity hardware and free open source software.

\noindent\textbf{Practical implications} --- xxx

\noindent\textbf{Originality/value} --- xxx
\end{abstract}

\section{Introduction}

Digital institutional repositories have become a hot topic over the last few years, and many institutions around the world are now actively working towards implementing them. In this article we discuss how low cost yet fully functional digital institutional repositories (IRs) can be set up in a very short time frame. We reflect on the lessons learned while implementing three different repositories at the University of Otago and suggest some best practices for implementing an IR. We also discuss the issues that must be considered when moving from a small-scale pilot implementation to a full roll-out.

Interest in institutional repositories at the University of Otago was sparked by the release of the New Zealand Digital Strategy by the New Zealand government in May 2005. The strategy aims to ensure that ``New Zealand is a world leader in using information and technology to realise our economic, environmental, social and cultural goals'' \cite{NZG-2005-digital_strategy}. In parallel with this, the National Library of New Zealand set up an expert working party with representatives from across the research sector to investigate the feasibility of establishing a national institutional repository for New Zealand's research outputs \cite{Rank-J-2005-feasibility}. The National Library is fostering the creation and launch of a work programme to improve access to New Zealand's research outputs, by collaborating with institutions to stimulate the set-up of research repositories.

In May 2005, two senior University of Otago staff undertook a study tour of Digital Challenges facing universities in the United States. Their report provided the immediate impetus for the first IR pilot in Otago's School of Business. Project work began on 7 November 2005, with the following goals:
 
\begin{itemize}

\item To establish a proof of concept demonstrator for storing and making available as ``open access'', digital research publications in the School of Business.

\item To evaluate the potential of the demonstrator for adoption by the wider Otago University research community.

\item To connect the School of Business with the global research community, in line with the feasibility study and recommended actions for a national repositories framework for New Zealand's research outputs \cite{Rank-J-2005-feasibility}.

\end{itemize}

\section{Implementation of the first pilot}

The GNU EPrints repository management software was chosen for the pilot repository because it was widely used, well-supported, inexpensive and would not lock the School into specific technologies or vendors \cite{Sale-A-2005-NZIRW}. The development team also had prior experience with the software. A rapid prototyping methodology was adopted, emphasising quick releases of visible results with multiple iterations, in order to create interest in the project at an early stage, and enable a positive feedback cycle. A sandbox was used to test entries and entry formats before the material went live.

The pilot IR was fully implemented within ten days of assembling the project team, with most of this time spent tweaking the look and feel of the web site and collecting content. This outcome was possible because of the establishment of a very clear brief to ``prove the concept'', rather than taking on a large scale project that would involve many different disciplines, researchers and research outputs from the outset. Early decisions were made to restrict the content and content domain used for the pilot, in order to speed the collection process and minimise the possibility of requirement ``creep''. Meetings were kept to a minimum and policy and procedural issues that required institutional decisions were noted as work progressed, rather than tackled head on. The project was widely publicised within the School and Heads of Departments were consulted to ensure top-level buy-in. This approach produced immediate results and the repository was quickly populated with a range of working/discussion papers, conference items, journal articles and theses.

There was no cost associated with the open access software community associated with GNU EPrints, and from a technical point of view the project was wonderfully straightforward. The School of Business IR\footnote{\url{http://eprints.otago.ac.nz/}} was deployed on a spare mid-range server running FreeBSD, which meant that hardware and software costs were essentially nil. In other words, if you happen to have some spare hardware lying around, you can set up an initial repository very cheaply, and then expand it later.

A minimalist approach was taken with regard to gathering potential content; partly because of the prototypical nature of the project, and partly because material in the hand is worth more than a million promises of what authors suggest they ``can'' provide if given sufficient time. New publications are always being created, and content acquisition is a moving target that has to be effectively managed. Once some basic content acquisition and data entry protocols were put in place, an incremental methodology was adopted. Content was strictly limited to voluntary contributions in PDF format from colleagues in the School of Business, but with no constraint on the type of output. As of mid-September 2006, the IR contains 327 documents covering a wide range of topics and document types, and these are added to as new content is acquired. A more systematic approach to content collection is currently being considered.

It is remarkable what can be achieved by a small, dedicated, knowledgeable and enthusiastic implementation team. As with any project, the right mix of technical and project management skills is crucial in making things happen. The project team comprised the School's Research Development Coordinator (project management and evangelism), an Information Science lecturer (software implementation), the School's IT manager (hardware and deployment) and two senior students (research, content acquisition and data entry). Oversight was provided by a standing committee comprising representatives from Information Technology Services, the University Library and the School of Business.

\section{Impact of the pilot}

The initial response to the pilot repository seemed spectacular, with over 18,000 downloads recorded within the first three months, from a very wide range of different countries. This was considerably more than several similar repositories elsewhere in the world and excited considerable interest from both inside and outside the University. It was therefore somewhat disheartening to discover in April 2006 that the hit rates were in fact over-inflated by a factor of about five. This was due to an undocumented assumption in the Tasmania statistics generating software \cite{Sale-A-2006-stats} that resulted in hits being counted more than once if the statistics were gathered more often than once per day. (The lesson here is to always be wary of computers bearing wonderful news!)

Despite this, hit rates for the Otago IR are still healthy, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig-otago-growth}. Interestingly, the repository attracts many more abstract views than downloads. An informal analysis of hit rates for five other repositories around the world shows that the same is true for some of them, while for others the opposite occurs (many more downloads than abstract views). Further investigation is needed to determine why this variation occurs.

\begin{figure}
	\centering
	\includegraphics[scale=0.79]{otago_growth}
	\caption{Total monthly hit rates (bar chart, left axis) and number of items (line chart, right axis) for the Otago repository.}
	\label{fig-otago-growth}
\end{figure}

Of particular interest is that hit rates on the Otago IR have grown at a much more rapid rate than the other repositories were examined, especially when time since launch is taken into account. As can be seen in Figure~\ref{fig-growth-comparison}, total traffic to the Otago IR has grown much more rapidly during its early months than any of the other repositories, including some that have existed for much longer. Clearly this is a very interesting development, and a research project is currently underway to investigate the possible reasons for this.

\begin{figure}
	\centering
	\includegraphics[scale=0.8]{growth_comparison}
	\caption{Comparison of traffic growth across eight EPrints repositories.}
	\label{fig-growth-comparison}
\end{figure}

One exciting outcome of the IR deployment has been the ability to make publicly available material that might otherwise be inaccessible. For example, Figure~\ref{fig-item-types} shows that about two thirds of the items in the Otago IR are items that might not otherwise be readily accessible, such as theses, dissertations, and various working and discussion papers. Indeed, the top ten downloaded items as of mid-September comprise five departmental working papers, two conference papers, one journal paper, one thesis and one research report, in essentially that order.

\begin{figure}
	\centering
	\includegraphics[scale=0.8]{otago_items}
	\caption{Distribution of item types in the Otago repository.}
	\label{fig-item-types}
\end{figure}

The pilot implementation was clearly a success. Indeed, it was so successful that the ``pilot'' status was dropped in mid-May, and it is now the official IR for Otago's School of Business. The lessons learned from this experience have since been applied to two other IRs at Otago, with potentially more to come.

\section{The second IR: EPrints Te Tumu}

The success of the pilot resulted in considerable interest throughout the University community. In early 2006, Te Tumu, the University's School of Maori, Pacific \& Indigenous Studies, expressed an interest in implementing an IR for their specific needs. They were particularly interested in the use of an IR as a means of disseminating research and other work, as there are relatively few ``official'' outlets for their discipline.

Drawing on experiences from the pilot, the Te Tumu IR\footnote{\url{http://eprintstetumu.otago.ac.nz/}} was implemented by a single person in about a month, and was officially launched on May 3 2006, making it the first IR for indigenous studies in New Zealand (and possibly the world). Response to the repository has been positive, with over 2,500 downloads from 46 different countries during its first four and half months (the repository currently contains about 30 items).

\section{Issues that arose}

[all of these to be expanded]

\begin{itemize}

\item Copyright: who owns it, perception vs.\ reality.

\item Data standards: metadata, interoperability with Library systems, etc.

\item Data entry: trained vs.\ non-trained users, editorial control.

\item Content acquisition: voluntary vs.\ mandatory.

\item Types of content: quality vs.\ quantity, currency vs.\ archival, media types, non-digital material, etc.

\end{itemize}

\section{Rollout to the wider University}

The University is currently in the process of determining whether to proceed with a full implementation of an IR for the University. [decision due any time now] If such a rollout occurs, the repository will become the responsibility of the University Library, which is a logical place for such a resource to be managed. The Library has expressed strong support for going ahead with a wider rollout. Regardless of whether this occurs, the School of Business has committed to continuing with the existing IR.

Further issues that need to be considered in this context:

\begin{itemize}

\item Management: library vs.\ IT, oversight, position within the University.

\item Integration: single monolithic repository vs.\ many small distributed repositories (we are already heading in the direction of the second model); integration with existing information systems.

\item Data entry: authors (self-archiving) vs.\ library staff.

\item others...

\end{itemize}

\section{Looking ahead: Community repositories}

An exciting consequence of our work on the School of Business pilot has been an approach from various communities throughout New Zealand to set up repositories of historical material relating to their community. The first of these was Cardrona\footnote{\url{http://cardrona.eprints.otago.ac.nz/}}, a small Central Otago community with a long and varied history. We recently launched the Cardrona Community Repository, which is the first community repository in New Zealand [possibly the world?]. Digital repositories offer communities a wonderful opportunity to preserve their historical and cultural information, and to disseminate it to a much wider audience than would normally be possible.

\section{Conclusions etc.}

[to come later]

\bibliography{OCLC}

\end{document}

\documentclass[12pt,pdftex,a4paper,titlepage]{article}

\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
\usepackage{textcomp}
\usepackage{lmodern}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage[margin=1in]{geometry}
\usepackage{pifont}
\usepackage[dcucite]{harvard}
\usepackage{url}

\title{Building institutional repositories on a shoestring}
\author{Nigel Stanger}
\date{University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand}

\begin{document}

\maketitle

\bibliographystyle{dcu}

\begin{abstract}
\textbf{Purpose} --- To demonstrate the ease of implementing digital institutional repositories.

\noindent\textbf{Practical implications} --- xxx

\noindent\textbf{Originality/value} --- xxx
\end{abstract}

\section{Introduction}

Digital institutional repositories have become a hot topic over the last few years, and many institutions around the world are now considering or actively working towards implementing them. In this article we discuss how low cost yet fully functional digital institutional repositories (IRs) can be set up in a very short time frame. We reflect on the lessons learned while implementing three different repositories at the University of Otago and suggest some best practices for implementing an IR. We also discuss the issues that must be considered when moving from a small-scale pilot implementation to a full roll-out.

% \section{Background}

Interest in institutional repositories at the University of Otago was sparked by the release of the New Zealand Digital Strategy by the New Zealand government in May 2005. The strategy has the stated goal of ``ensuring New Zealand is a world leader in using information and technology to realise our economic, environmental, social and cultural goals'' \cite{NZG-2005-digital_strategy}. In parallel with this, the National Library of New Zealand set up an expert working party with representatives from across the research sector to investigate the feasibility of establishing a national institutional repository for New Zealand's research outputs \cite{Rank-J-2005-feasibility}. The National Library is fostering the creation and launch of a work programme to improve access to New Zealand's research outputs, by collaborating with institutions to stimulate the set-up of research repositories.

\item To establish a proof of concept demonstrator for storing and making available as ``open access'', digital research publications in the School of Business.

\item To evaluate the potential of the demonstrator for adoption by the wider Otago University research community.

\end{itemize}

\section{Implementation of the first pilot}

The GNU EPrints repository management software was chosen because it was widely used, well-supported, inexpensive and would not lock us into specific technologies or vendors \cite{Sale-A-2005-NZIRW}. The development team also had prior experience with the software. A rapid prototyping methodology was adopted, emphasising quick releases of visible results with multiple iterations, in order to create interest in the project at an early stage, and enable a positive feedback cycle. A sandbox was used to test entries and entry formats before the material went live.

The pilot IR was fully implemented within ten days of assembling the project team. This outcome was possible because of the establishment of a very clear brief to ``prove the concept'', rather than taking on a large scale project that would involve many different disciplines, researchers and research outputs from the outset. Early decisions were made to restrict the content and content domain used for the pilot, in order to speed the collection process and minimise the possibility of requirement ``creep''. Meetings were kept to a minimum and policy and procedural issues that required institutional decisions were noted as work progressed, rather than tackled head on. The project was widely publicised within the School and Heads of Departments were consulted to ensure top-level buy-in. This approach produced immediate results and the repository was quickly populated with a range of working/discussion papers, conference items, journal articles and theses.

It is remarkable what can be achieved by a small, dedicated, knowledgeable and enthusiastic implementation team. As with any project, the right mix of technical and project management skills is crucial in making things happen. The project team comprised the School's Research Development Coordinator (project management and evangelism), an Information Science lecturer (software implementation), the School's IT manager (hardware and deployment) and two senior students (research, content acquisition and data entry). Oversight was provided by a standing committee comprising representatives from the Information Technology Services Division, the University Library and the School of Business.

\section{Impact of the pilot}

The initial response to the pilot repository seemed spectacular, with over 18,000 downloads recorded within the first three months. This was considerably more than similar IRs elsewhere in the world and excited considerable interest from both inside and outside the University. It was therefore somewhat disheartening to discover in April 2006 that the download counts were in fact over-inflated by a factor of about five. This was due to an undocumented assumption in the Tasmania statistics generating software \cite{Sale-A-2006-stats} that resulted in downloads being counted more than once if the statistics were calculated more often than once per day. (The lesson here is to always be wary of computers bearing good news!)

Despite this setback, the download rates for the IR are still comparatively higher than several other similar repositories, especially when time since launch is taken into account. As of mid-September 2006 [more detail to come as I have yet to collate some of the data] Clearly this is a very interesting development, and a research project is currently underway to investigate the possible reasons behind this.

One exciting outcome of the IR deployment has been the ability to make publicly available material that might otherwise be inaccessible. For example, over two thirds of the items in the repository are

\section{The second IR: EPrints Te Tumu}

The success of the first pilot produced considerable interest throughout the University community. We were approached in early 2006 by Te Tumu, the University's School of Maori, Pacific \& Indigenous Studies, to set up an IR for their specific needs. They were particularly interested in the use of an IR as a means of disseminating research and other work, as there are relatively fewer ``official'' outlets for such work in their discipline.

Drawing on our experiences with the first pilot, the Te Tumu repository\footnote{\url{http://eprintstetumu.otago.ac.nz/}} was implemented by a single person in about a month, and was officially launched on May 3 2006, making it the first IR for indigenous studies in New Zealand [possibly the world]. Response to the repository has been positive, with nearly 400 downloads in the first month (the repository currently contains about 20 items).

\section{Issues that arose}

[all of these to be expanded]

\begin{itemize}

\item Copyright: who owns it, perception vs.\ reality.

\item Data standards: metadata, interoperability with Library systems, etc.

\item Data entry: trained vs.\ non-trained users, editorial control.

\item Content acquisition: voluntary vs.\ mandatory.

\item Types of content: quality vs.\ quantity, currency vs.\ archival, media types, non-digital material, etc.

\end{itemize}

\section{Rollout to the wider University}

Further issues that need to be considered in this context:

\begin{itemize}

\item Management: library vs.\ IT, oversight, position within the University.

\item Integration: single monolithic repository vs.\ many small distributed repositories (we are already heading in the direction of the second model); integration with existing information systems.

\item Data entry: authors (self-archiving) vs.\ library staff.

\item others...

\end{itemize}

\section{Looking ahead: Community repositories}

\section{Conclusions etc.}

[to come later]

\bibliography{OCLC}

\end{document}

Ignore Space Show notes View chunk_logstubs 0 → 100755
.001 .001 .01 .01 .1 .1 1 1 10 10 100 100 1000 1,000 10000 10,000 100000 100,000 1000000 1,000,000

Ignore Space Show notes View chunk_logtics 0 → 100755
.002 .003 .004 .005 .006 .007 .008 .009 .02 .03 .04 .05 .06 .07 .08 .09 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000 90000 200000 300000 400000 500000 600000 700000 800000 900000

Ignore Space Show notes View growth_comparison.plo
#proc settings units: cm #endproc #proc getdata delim: comma fieldnameheader: yes data: month_num,dlist,nott,otago,tetumu,cardrona,rhodes,unimelb,utas 1,,,635,953,34,300,10, 2,,,3565,2447,128,470,56, 3,,,6496,3943,318,650,154, 4,,,11298,5281,441,1377,416, 5,,,24861,6406,492,2291,2028,648 6,,,36886,,,3947,4206,1370 7,,,46395,,,6457,7362,2034 8,,,63040,,,9783,10110,3015 9,,,78041,,,13319,13154,3947 10,,,92012,,,17186,17585,5093 11,,,99957,,,21912,21989,6262 12,,,,,,28170,26105,7427 13,,,,,,37128,30811,8632 14,,,,,,47318,34461,10147 15,,,,,,64535,37933,15832 16,,,,,,79102,43021,18549 17,,,,,,95622,47437,21345 18,,,,,,116412,53016,23557 19,,,,,,129879,57940,25248 20,,,,,,,63241,27955 21,,,,,,,67787,30075 22,,,,,,,72225,33959 23,,,,,,,78564,36495 24,,,,,,,86261,41992 25,,47,,,,,94863,44939 26,,265,,,,,102209,47652 27,,789,,,,,109919,56616 28,,1448,,,,,124096,63729 29,,1959,,,,,137886, 30,,2472,,,,,148781, 31,,3179,,,,,160806, 32,,3812,,,,,181316, 33,,4657,,,,,203516, 34,,5678,,,,,228802, 35,30278,7915,,,,,301219, 36,68750,9133,,,,,329998, 37,101465,10077,,,,,357745, 38,135970,12650,,,,,394545, 39,184082,14028,,,,,427421, 40,225271,15407,,,,,455542, 41,261710,17051,,,,,488225, 42,297391,18788,,,,,530291, 43,364929,20494,,,,,567140, 44,427791,22153,,,,,601128, 45,497751,24117,,,,,636589, 46,560709,25977,,,,,683385, 47,627996,27845,,,,,743871, 48,694584,29510,,,,,793852, 49,765977,30892,,,,,863686, 50,830295,32488,,,,,957022, 51,870771,34352,,,,,1060951, 52,,37524,,,,,1123417, 53,,40101,,,,,1172570, 54,,42120,,,,,, 55,,44110,,,,,, 56,,56590,,,,,, 57,,77484,,,,,, 58,,93374,,,,,, 59,,100521,,,,,, 60,,103695,,,,,, 61,,106247,,,,,, 62,,108905,,,,,, // 63,,109951,,,,,, #proc areadef areaname: standard xscaletype: linear yscaletype: log xrange: 0 67 yrange: 1 2000000 #proc xaxis stubs: inc 5 stubdetails: size=12 label: Months since launch labeldetails: style=B size=12 adjust=0,-0.3 ticlen: 0.25 minortics: yes minorticinc: 1 minorticlen: 0.1 #proc yaxis selflocatingstubs: text #include chunk_logstubs stubdetails: size=12 label: Cumulative number of hits labeldetails: style=B size=12 adjust=-0.9,0 grid: color=gray(0.7) ticlen: 0.25 #proc yaxis: axisline: none selflocatingstubs: text #include chunk_logtics ticlen: 0.1 #proc lineplot xfield: month_num yfield: dlist linedetails: style=0 label: DLIST labeldetails: size=10 adjust=0,-0.1 #proc lineplot xfield: month_num yfield: nott linedetails: style=0 label: Nottingham labeldetails: size=10 adjust=-1.5,0.25 #proc lineplot xfield: month_num yfield: otago linedetails: width=2 style=0 label: Otago SoB labeldetails: size=10 style=B adjust=-1.5,0.3 #proc lineplot xfield: month_num yfield: tetumu linedetails: style=3 label: Te Tumu labeldetails: size=10 #proc lineplot xfield: month_num yfield: cardrona linedetails: style=3 label: Cardrona labeldetails: size=10 #proc lineplot xfield: month_num yfield: rhodes linedetails: style=3 label: Rhodes labeldetails: size=10 adjust=-0.6,0.25 #proc lineplot xfield: month_num yfield: unimelb linedetails: style=0 label: Melbourne labeldetails: size=10 adjust=0,0.1 #proc lineplot xfield: month_num yfield: utas linedetails: style=0 label: Tasmania labeldetails: size=10 #proc settings units: cm #endproc #proc getdata delim: comma fieldnameheader: yes data: month,num_items,num_abstracts,num_downloads 15/11/2005,43,402,233 15/12/2005,134,2218,712 15/01/2006,141,1973,958 15/02/2006,214,3246,1556 15/03/2006,233,9862,3701 15/04/2006,244,7975,4050 15/05/2006,253,6071,3438 15/06/2006,262,13006,3639 15/07/2006,268,12210,2791 15/08/2006,313,10083,3888 #proc areadef areaname: standard xscaletype: date dd/mm/yyyy yscaletype: linear xautorange: datafield=month yautorange: datafield=num_abstracts #proc xaxis stubs: datematic stubslide: 15(s) autoyears: yyyy stubdetails: size=10 label: Month labeldetails: style=B size=10 adjust=0,-0.3 ticlen: 0.25 #proc yaxis stubs: inc 2000 stubdetails: size=10 label: Number of accesses labeldetails: style=B size=10 adjust=-0.5,0 grid: color=gray(0.7) ticlen: 0.25 #proc bars locfield: month lenfield: num_abstracts barwidth: 0.5 cluster: 1 / 2 color: white legendlabel: Abstracts #proc bars locfield: month lenfield: num_downloads barwidth: 0.5 cluster: 2 / 2 legendlabel: Downloads #proc areadef areaname: standard xscaletype: date dd/mm/yyyy yscaletype: linear xautorange: datafield=month yautorange: datafield=num_items #proc yaxis: stubs: inc 50 stubdetails: size=10 adjust=0.8,0 align=left label: Number of items labeldetails: style=B size=10 adjust=2.5,0 ticlen: -0.25 location: max #proc lineplot xfield: month yfield: num_items legendlabel: Archive size linedetails: width=2 #proc legend format: singleline location: min+1 max-0.6 textdetails: size=10 seglen: 0.25 swatchsize: 0.25 outlinecolors: yes frame: yes backcolor: white

Ignore Space Show notes View

growth_comparison.plo

#proc settings
	units: cm
#endproc

#proc getdata
	delim: comma
	fieldnameheader: yes
	data:
		month_num,dlist,nott,otago,tetumu,cardrona,rhodes,unimelb,utas
		1,,,635,953,34,300,10,
		2,,,3565,2447,128,470,56,
		3,,,6496,3943,318,650,154,
		4,,,11298,5281,441,1377,416,
		5,,,24861,6406,492,2291,2028,648
		6,,,36886,,,3947,4206,1370
		7,,,46395,,,6457,7362,2034
		8,,,63040,,,9783,10110,3015
		9,,,78041,,,13319,13154,3947
		10,,,92012,,,17186,17585,5093
		11,,,99957,,,21912,21989,6262
		12,,,,,,28170,26105,7427
		13,,,,,,37128,30811,8632
		14,,,,,,47318,34461,10147
		15,,,,,,64535,37933,15832
		16,,,,,,79102,43021,18549
		17,,,,,,95622,47437,21345
		18,,,,,,116412,53016,23557
		19,,,,,,129879,57940,25248
		20,,,,,,,63241,27955
		21,,,,,,,67787,30075
		22,,,,,,,72225,33959
		23,,,,,,,78564,36495
		24,,,,,,,86261,41992
		25,,47,,,,,94863,44939
		26,,265,,,,,102209,47652
		27,,789,,,,,109919,56616
		28,,1448,,,,,124096,63729
		29,,1959,,,,,137886,
		30,,2472,,,,,148781,
		31,,3179,,,,,160806,
		32,,3812,,,,,181316,
		33,,4657,,,,,203516,
		34,,5678,,,,,228802,
		35,30278,7915,,,,,301219,
		36,68750,9133,,,,,329998,
		37,101465,10077,,,,,357745,
		38,135970,12650,,,,,394545,
		39,184082,14028,,,,,427421,
		40,225271,15407,,,,,455542,
		41,261710,17051,,,,,488225,
		42,297391,18788,,,,,530291,
		43,364929,20494,,,,,567140,
		44,427791,22153,,,,,601128,
		45,497751,24117,,,,,636589,
		46,560709,25977,,,,,683385,
		47,627996,27845,,,,,743871,
		48,694584,29510,,,,,793852,
		49,765977,30892,,,,,863686,
		50,830295,32488,,,,,957022,
		51,870771,34352,,,,,1060951,
		52,,37524,,,,,1123417,
		53,,40101,,,,,1172570,
		54,,42120,,,,,,
		55,,44110,,,,,,
		56,,56590,,,,,,
		57,,77484,,,,,,
		58,,93374,,,,,,
		59,,100521,,,,,,
		60,,103695,,,,,,
		61,,106247,,,,,,
		62,,108905,,,,,,
//		63,,109951,,,,,,

#proc areadef
	areaname: standard
	xscaletype: linear
	yscaletype: log
	xrange: 0 67
	yrange: 1 2000000

#proc xaxis
	stubs: inc 5
	stubdetails: size=12
	label: Months since launch
	labeldetails: style=B size=12 adjust=0,-0.3
	ticlen: 0.25
	minortics: yes
	minorticinc: 1
	minorticlen: 0.1

#proc yaxis
	selflocatingstubs: text
		#include chunk_logstubs
	stubdetails: size=12
	label: Cumulative number of hits
	labeldetails: style=B size=12 adjust=-0.9,0
	grid: color=gray(0.7)
	ticlen: 0.25

#proc yaxis:
	axisline: none
	selflocatingstubs: text
		#include chunk_logtics
	ticlen: 0.1

#proc lineplot
	xfield: month_num
	yfield: dlist
	linedetails: style=0
	label: DLIST
	labeldetails: size=10 adjust=0,-0.1

#proc lineplot
	xfield: month_num
	yfield: nott
	linedetails: style=0
	label: Nottingham
	labeldetails: size=10 adjust=-1.5,0.25

#proc lineplot
	xfield: month_num
	yfield: otago
	linedetails: width=2 style=0
	label: Otago SoB
	labeldetails: size=10 style=B adjust=-1.5,0.3

#proc lineplot
	xfield: month_num
	yfield: tetumu
	linedetails: style=3
	label: Te Tumu
	labeldetails: size=10

#proc lineplot
	xfield: month_num
	yfield: cardrona
	linedetails: style=3
	label: Cardrona
	labeldetails: size=10

#proc lineplot
	xfield: month_num
	yfield: rhodes
	linedetails: style=3
	label: Rhodes
	labeldetails: size=10 adjust=-0.6,0.25

#proc lineplot
	xfield: month_num
	yfield: unimelb
	linedetails: style=0
	label: Melbourne
	labeldetails: size=10 adjust=0,0.1

#proc lineplot
	xfield: month_num
	yfield: utas
	linedetails: style=0
	label: Tasmania
	labeldetails: size=10

#proc settings
	units: cm
#endproc

#proc getdata
	delim: comma
	fieldnameheader: yes
	data:
		month,num_items,num_abstracts,num_downloads
		15/11/2005,43,402,233
		15/12/2005,134,2218,712
		15/01/2006,141,1973,958
		15/02/2006,214,3246,1556
		15/03/2006,233,9862,3701
		15/04/2006,244,7975,4050
		15/05/2006,253,6071,3438
		15/06/2006,262,13006,3639
		15/07/2006,268,12210,2791
		15/08/2006,313,10083,3888

#proc areadef
	areaname: standard
	xscaletype: date dd/mm/yyyy
	yscaletype: linear
	xautorange: datafield=month
	yautorange: datafield=num_abstracts

#proc xaxis
	stubs: datematic
	stubslide: 15(s)
	autoyears: yyyy
	stubdetails: size=10
	label: Month
	labeldetails: style=B size=10 adjust=0,-0.3
	ticlen: 0.25

#proc yaxis
	stubs: inc 2000
	stubdetails: size=10
	label: Number of accesses
	labeldetails: style=B size=10 adjust=-0.5,0
	grid: color=gray(0.7)
	ticlen: 0.25

#proc bars
	locfield: month
	lenfield: num_abstracts
	barwidth: 0.5
	cluster: 1 / 2
	color: white
	legendlabel: Abstracts

#proc bars
	locfield: month
	lenfield: num_downloads
	barwidth: 0.5
	cluster: 2 / 2
	legendlabel: Downloads

#proc areadef
	areaname: standard
	xscaletype: date dd/mm/yyyy
	yscaletype: linear
	xautorange: datafield=month
	yautorange: datafield=num_items

#proc yaxis:
	stubs: inc 50
	stubdetails: size=10 adjust=0.8,0 align=left
	label: Number of items
	labeldetails: style=B size=10 adjust=2.5,0
	ticlen: -0.25
	location: max

#proc lineplot
	xfield: month
	yfield: num_items
	legendlabel: Archive size
	linedetails: width=2

#proc legend
	format: singleline
	location: min+1 max-0.6
	textdetails: size=10
	seglen: 0.25
	swatchsize: 0.25
	outlinecolors: yes
	frame: yes
	backcolor: white

Ignore Space Show notes View otago_growth.plo
#proc settings units: cm #endproc #proc getdata delim: comma fieldnameheader: yes data: the_month,num_items,num_abstracts,num_downloads 15/11/2005,43,402,233 15/12/2005,134,2218,712 15/01/2006,141,1973,958 15/02/2006,214,3246,1556 15/03/2006,233,9862,3701 15/04/2006,244,7975,4050 15/05/2006,253,6071,3438 15/06/2006,262,13006,3639 15/07/2006,268,12210,2791 15/08/2006,313,10083,3888 #proc areadef areaname: standard xscaletype: date dd/mm/yyyy yscaletype: linear xautorange: datafield=the_month yautorange: datafield=num_abstracts #proc xaxis stubs: datematic stubslide: 15(s) autoyears: yyyy stubdetails: size=12 label: Month labeldetails: style=B size=12 adjust=0,-0.5 ticlen: 0.25 #proc yaxis stubs: inc 2000 stubdetails: size=12 label: Number of hits labeldetails: style=B size=12 adjust=-0.7,0 grid: color=gray(0.7) ticlen: 0.25 #proc bars locfield: the_month lenfield: num_abstracts barwidth: 0.5 cluster: 1 / 2 color: white legendlabel: Abstracts #proc bars locfield: the_month lenfield: num_downloads barwidth: 0.5 cluster: 2 / 2 legendlabel: Downloads #proc areadef areaname: standard xscaletype: date dd/mm/yyyy yscaletype: linear xautorange: datafield=the_month yautorange: datafield=num_items #proc yaxis: stubs: inc 50 stubdetails: size=12 adjust=0.8,0 align=left label: Number of items labeldetails: style=B size=12 adjust=2.7,0 ticlen: -0.25 location: max #proc lineplot xfield: the_month yfield: num_items legendlabel: Repository size linedetails: width=2 #proc legend format: singleline location: min+1 max-0.6 textdetails: size=12 seglen: 0.25 swatchsize: 0.25 outlinecolors: yes frame: yes backcolor: white #proc settings units: cm #endproc #proc getdata delim: comma fieldnameheader: yes data: month,num_items,num_abstracts,num_downloads 15/11/2005,43,402,233 15/12/2005,134,2218,712 15/01/2006,141,1973,958 15/02/2006,214,3246,1556 15/03/2006,233,9862,3701 15/04/2006,244,7975,4050 15/05/2006,253,6071,3438 15/06/2006,262,13006,3639 15/07/2006,268,12210,2791 15/08/2006,313,10083,3888 #proc areadef areaname: standard xscaletype: date dd/mm/yyyy yscaletype: linear xautorange: datafield=month yautorange: datafield=num_abstracts #proc xaxis stubs: datematic stubslide: 15(s) autoyears: yyyy stubdetails: size=10 label: Month labeldetails: style=B size=10 adjust=0,-0.3 ticlen: 0.25 #proc yaxis stubs: inc 2000 stubdetails: size=10 label: Number of accesses labeldetails: style=B size=10 adjust=-0.5,0 grid: color=gray(0.7) ticlen: 0.25 #proc bars locfield: month lenfield: num_abstracts barwidth: 0.5 cluster: 1 / 2 color: white legendlabel: Abstracts #proc bars locfield: month lenfield: num_downloads barwidth: 0.5 cluster: 2 / 2 legendlabel: Downloads #proc areadef areaname: standard xscaletype: date dd/mm/yyyy yscaletype: linear xautorange: datafield=month yautorange: datafield=num_items #proc yaxis: stubs: inc 50 stubdetails: size=10 adjust=0.8,0 align=left label: Number of items labeldetails: style=B size=10 adjust=2.5,0 ticlen: -0.25 location: max #proc lineplot xfield: month yfield: num_items legendlabel: Archive size linedetails: width=2 #proc legend format: singleline location: min+1 max-0.6 textdetails: size=10 seglen: 0.25 swatchsize: 0.25 outlinecolors: yes frame: yes backcolor: white

Ignore Space Show notes View

otago_growth.plo

#proc settings
	units: cm
#endproc

#proc getdata
	delim: comma
	fieldnameheader: yes
	data:
		the_month,num_items,num_abstracts,num_downloads
		15/11/2005,43,402,233
		15/12/2005,134,2218,712
		15/01/2006,141,1973,958
		15/02/2006,214,3246,1556
		15/03/2006,233,9862,3701
		15/04/2006,244,7975,4050
		15/05/2006,253,6071,3438
		15/06/2006,262,13006,3639
		15/07/2006,268,12210,2791
		15/08/2006,313,10083,3888

#proc areadef
	areaname: standard
	xscaletype: date dd/mm/yyyy
	yscaletype: linear
	xautorange: datafield=the_month
	yautorange: datafield=num_abstracts

#proc xaxis
	stubs: datematic
	stubslide: 15(s)
	autoyears: yyyy
	stubdetails: size=12
	label: Month
	labeldetails: style=B size=12 adjust=0,-0.5
	ticlen: 0.25

#proc yaxis
	stubs: inc 2000
	stubdetails: size=12
	label: Number of hits
	labeldetails: style=B size=12 adjust=-0.7,0
	grid: color=gray(0.7)
	ticlen: 0.25

#proc bars
	locfield: the_month
	lenfield: num_abstracts
	barwidth: 0.5
	cluster: 1 / 2
	color: white
	legendlabel: Abstracts

#proc bars
	locfield: the_month
	lenfield: num_downloads
	barwidth: 0.5
	cluster: 2 / 2
	legendlabel: Downloads

#proc areadef
	areaname: standard
	xscaletype: date dd/mm/yyyy
	yscaletype: linear
	xautorange: datafield=the_month
	yautorange: datafield=num_items

#proc yaxis:
	stubs: inc 50
	stubdetails: size=12 adjust=0.8,0 align=left
	label: Number of items
	labeldetails: style=B size=12 adjust=2.7,0
	ticlen: -0.25
	location: max

#proc lineplot
	xfield: the_month
	yfield: num_items
	legendlabel: Repository size
	linedetails: width=2

#proc legend
	format: singleline
	location: min+1 max-0.6
	textdetails: size=12
	seglen: 0.25
	swatchsize: 0.25
	outlinecolors: yes
	frame: yes
	backcolor: white