The procedure in which authors submit a signed deposit agreement in print to theSLUB Dresden in addition to accepting an agreement during the online submissionprocedure was already explained above (see Ingest). It goes without saying that Qucosashould take care that the signed agreements are archived with the necessary precautionas they form the legal base of both the publication and the preservation process.Administration: Establish Standards and PoliciesAccording to the Qucosa Policy, the repository serves the following purpose:Qucosa dient der Publikation, dem Nachweis und der langfristigen Archivierung vonDokumenten aus Wissenschaft und Wirtschaft. Das von den wissenschaftlichen Bibliotheken imFreistaat Sachsen getragene Angebot ist Teil der internationalen Open-Access-Bewegung.(Qucosa Policy)This policy statement contains a commitment to long-term preservation which is furtherspecified in the FAQ: “Die Publikationen sind ohne zeitliche Beschränkung verfügbar undfür die langfristige Archivierung vorgesehen” (Qucosa FAQ). According to this statement,Qucosa currently guarantees the long term accessibility of bitstreams and is planning toimplement long-term preservation measures in the future. Should more concretestatements about or commitments to long-term preservation be made in the future, itmight be worth considering the definition of different preservation service levels (e.g. inanalogy to the DSpace levels; see Bass et al. 2002) to indicate which <strong>file</strong> formats will be(attempted to be) preserved and which might be too difficult to preserve. This seemsadvisable especially as the repository also accepts dynamic content in proprietary <strong>file</strong>formats, which might pose considerable problems for long-term preservation.For the selection of content, Qucosa has outlined a set of criteria defining whichdocuments will be accepted for publication (stated in the Qucosa Policy and thePublication Guidelines). Thus, the following criteria have to be fulfilled for a document tobe accepted for publication:Ein über Qucosa zu veröffentlichendes elektronisches Dokument erfüllt folgende Bedingungen:1. Es ist zur Verbreitung in der Öffentlichkeit bestimmt.2. Sind Aktualisierungen am jeweiligen Dokument notwendig, wird das geänderte Dokumentals neue Version gespeichert.3. Das Dokument entspricht den von Qucosa vorgegebenen Veröffentlichungsparametern.(Qucosa Policy)The “publication parameters” mentioned above are stated in the publication guidelinesand include the document type 153 , the absence of DRM tools/measures, as well as theaffiliation of the author. Although the last criterion is not mentioned explicitly, and althoughthis rule may be subject to exception, Qucosa is currently a service open only todepositors from Saxon institutions.153 Document type, however, is a fairly non-distinctive criterion in that it also contains a category “Otherpublications.” Thus, currently, no publication type is explicitly excluded.66
While the preferred <strong>file</strong> format is <strong>PDF</strong> 154 , other formats – open and proprietary – areaccepted as well so that <strong>file</strong> format is currently not a selection criterion. In contrast topedocs, dynamic content/elements is/are not excluded.The designated community of Qucosa is at this point defined only very broadly andmoreover implicitly. Thus, it is stated in “Über Qucosa” that the repository is a servicefocusing on scholarly documents and documents from the business sector (“Dokument[e]aus Wissenschaft und Wirtschaft”). As the list of accepted document types shows, otherpublications included are musical scores 155 , which will be of interest to a very specificdesignated community that, however, will probably be very different from the designatedcommunity of publications from the business sector, for example. Finally, publicadministration institutions are also included in the list of institutions registered forsubmitting material to Qucosa, and their publications will be of interest to a veryheterogeneous group of users.For the purpose of monitoring the repository's designated community or communities,this implicit definition deriving from the published document types is far too imprecise. Onthe other hand, however, the question is whether it is feasible and possible to define thedesignated communities for a service like Qucosa, which is intended to collect andpreserve material from and for the entire federal state of Saxony, in a detailed fashion.Significant properties are not currently identified or defined for Qucosa publications.Although the significant properties are something that will have to be specified when thecooperation with a service provider for long-term preservation is brought under way, howthis is to be achieved is according to Dr. Kluge still unclear. Thus, in his opinion theconcept of significant properties seems to theoretic and abstract, in particular as it isentirely unclear to us today which properties will be regarded as significant by future usersand depositors (see also Knight 2008, 4). Thus it is worth considering, according to Kluge,a flexible and ad-hoc specification of significant properties together with the designatedcommunity whenever it becomes clear that a format is in danger of becoming obsoleteand if migration tests show that that information will be lost.Administration: Audit SubmissionA document is only published after intellectual control by a member of the repositorystaff. This quality control currently primarily concerns the associated descriptive metadata.In the future, with the implementation of koLibRI, quality control will also extend totechnical aspects such as <strong>file</strong> format validity, etc.154 In the <strong>file</strong> upload dialog, the required format of what in DSpace would be called the primary bitstream isgiven as <strong>PDF</strong>. However, the Qucosa software currently does not reject <strong>file</strong>s in other formats. As Qucosaalso accepts content such as audio, film, etc. it seems problematic to limit the preferred bitstream to <strong>PDF</strong> –this is a decision which should be reconsidered.155 In fact, the German Composers Association (Deutscher Komponistenverband) recommends thepublication of musical scores via Qucosa. See http://www.komponistenverband.de/content/view/471/117/ –18.10.2009.67
- Page 6:
AbstractTaking its cue from the inc
- Page 13:
and benefit from the development an
- Page 18 and 19:
German repositories have already be
- Page 20 and 21: [t]he Open Archival Information Sys
- Page 22 and 23: Thus it seems highly recommendable
- Page 24 and 25: actively pursuing the long-term pre
- Page 26 and 27: Like pedocs, the repository is not
- Page 28 and 29: application for a project grant was
- Page 30 and 31: generating an Archival Information
- Page 32 and 33: Integrity can be defined as “comp
- Page 34 and 35: It is with this step that the metad
- Page 36 and 37: documents submitted to the reposito
- Page 38 and 39: [t]he majority of OCR software supp
- Page 40 and 41: One of the shortcomings of the soft
- Page 42 and 43: set of shared metadata which is the
- Page 44 and 45: document, and that hence the docume
- Page 46: Structural metadata: In DSpace it i
- Page 49 and 50: dc.description.provenancedc.descrip
- Page 51 and 52: Für die Langzeitverfügbarkeit der
- Page 53 and 54: ecord for a title; although a workf
- Page 55 and 56: Source (where applicable)Publicatio
- Page 57 and 58: checksums. In particular, TRAC requ
- Page 59 and 60: checksums are currently not checked
- Page 61 and 62: 2.4.2 JUWEL Data ManagementThe stru
- Page 63 and 64: Before any SIPs are accepted, the r
- Page 65 and 66: guarantee that documents are “arc
- Page 67 and 68: pedocs is a scholarly open access d
- Page 69: formats. 151 Although the possible
- Page 73 and 74: from nestor criterion 8, making it
- Page 75 and 76: preserved for the long term, will h
- Page 77 and 78: It seems that of all three reposito
- Page 79 and 80: associated with them, or has define
- Page 81 and 82: versioning functionality which allo
- Page 83 and 84: communication channels, responsibil
- Page 85 and 86: Works CitedAllinson, Julie (2006):
- Page 87 and 88: DSpace Homepage. http://www.dspace.
- Page 89 and 90: Lynch, Clifford A. (2000): Authenti
- Page 91 and 92: in the EU. Amsterdam: Amsterdam Uni
- Page 93 and 94: Ingestnestor TRAC DINIReceive Submi
- Page 95 and 96: Archival Storagenestor TRAC DINIRec
- Page 97 and 98: Archival Information Update10.4 Das
- Page 99 and 100: Preservation PlanningnestorMonitor