156 results found

1. Pop-Up Cultural Advisory Notices

   We are an Australian-based Esploro customer and we have asset records containing culturally sensitive information/materials. Repository staff are currently adding the notice below to these records (which at this point, are primarily theses):

   "Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander peoples should be aware that this thesis and associated project files, may contain the images/voices/names of people who have since passed away. "

   Repository staff customise this message to include what is relevant for the asset record concerned, e.g. images and/or voices and/or names and to the type of publication.

   These advice statements would be more effectively highlighted as a pop-up that would appear when the Esploro record was accessed. We are currently adding them to the Comments field which is usually hidden on first accessing the record.

   Thank you
   Keely

   We are an Australian-based Esploro customer and we have asset records containing culturally sensitive information/materials. Repository staff are currently adding the notice below to these records (which at this point, are primarily theses):

   "Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander peoples should be aware that this thesis and associated project files, may contain the images/voices/names of people who have since passed away. "

   Repository staff customise this message to include what is relevant for the asset record concerned, e.g. images and/or voices and/or names and to the type of publication.

   These advice statements would be more effectively highlighted as a pop-up that… more

   17 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   2 comments  ·  Research Portal and Publishing  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

2. Add DOI/No DOI as a Facet to Smart Harvest author matching

   Articles with DOIs are easier to verify because you can click the DOI and review the published version of record.

   We would like a "has DOI" and "NO DOI" facet because this would speed up Smart Harvest author matching, and potentially allow lower-level staff to review.

   Staff could review "has DOI" matching and check the published version to verify affiliation. Records requiring more review or investigation could be left for higher-level staff.

   7 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   1 comment  ·  Smart Harvesting  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close
   AdminTami Ezra (Admin, Ex Libris) responded

   Removing the "accepted" status so that institution can continue voting as agreed with the PWG.

3. Add research topics at "add researcher" step within record

   When a researcher is incorrectly matched, we often have to create a new non-affiliated one in the record. We can add their affiliation, but we can't add research topics. If the name is common, we have to look them up by researcher and add the research topics.

   It would be more efficient to add research topics (as keywords) during this step.

   •  

   1 vote

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   0 comments  ·  Smart Harvesting  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close
   AdminTami Ezra (Admin, Ex Libris) responded

   Removing the "accepted" status so that institution can continue voting as agreed with the PWG.

4. Include asset status (provisional or approved) in Author Matching Report

   When using the Author Matching Report to approve individual researchers on records that were imported via smart harvest, we would find it very useful to be able to distinguish the asset status -- that is, to be able to tell if the asset is still provisional or if it is approved. If we approve one author on an asset, and then create an Author Matching Report it is useful context to know that there is a local co-author. It is also helpful to know there is no local co-author for authors that would typically write with other people at our institution. Finally, this would also allow us to see all the non-matches that are on provisional assets, and then make a set of those assets to delete the records that we don't want (for common names this can be over a hundred bad matches for an individual when we first run smart harvest). By identifying if the asset is provisional, it would be much easier to ensure we did not accidentally delete an approved asset just because of one bad author match.

   When using the Author Matching Report to approve individual researchers on records that were imported via smart harvest, we would find it very useful to be able to distinguish the asset status -- that is, to be able to tell if the asset is still provisional or if it is approved. If we approve one author on an asset, and then create an Author Matching Report it is useful context to know that there is a local co-author. It is also helpful to know there is no local co-author for authors that would typically write with other people at our… more

   1 vote

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   0 comments  ·  Research Repository  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close
   AdminTami Ezra (Admin, Ex Libris) responded

   Removing the "accepted" status so that institution can continue voting as agreed with the PWG.

5. Draft mediated deposits display in profile

   Currently, drafts of mediated deposits do not display in researcher profiles. Complicated mediated deposits like datasets often go through several drafts before they are ultimately approved and published. In these cases, it would be very useful for the draft deposit to display in the profiles of all affiliated researchers for their review and feedback.

   9 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   1 comment  ·  Researcher Profiles  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close
   AdminTami Ezra (Admin, Ex Libris) responded

   Removing the "accepted" status so that institution can continue voting as agreed with the PWG.

6. Esploro - Add action for assigning a name variant to job Update Set of Research Assets

   Sometimes we need to bulk update the name displayed in the Discovery Portal for a Researcher. To do so we create a new name variant but we would also like to bulk update all assets related to this specific Researcher with the new "Name Variant".

   To do so an action "Choose Name Variant" could be added to existing Job: Update Set of Research Assets / Task Creator or Contributor

   Such a feature would also be very useful to refine the data after an import via file or an harvesting.

   10 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   0 comments  ·  Research Portal and Publishing  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close
   Under Review  ·  AdminAnonymous (Admin, Ex Libris) responded

   
   

7. LoC and DC Headings

   We would like to have the availablity to select Library of Congress or Dublin Core Subject Headings instead of the ExLibris base set of subjects. We found that ExLibris's base set is poorly inadequate and it became a huge annoyance and time consuming to copy and paste the Library of Congress headings for our catalogers.

   47 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   Under Review  ·  1 comment  ·  Research Repository  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

8. Add credentials and licensure fields to researcher web profiles

   Our healthcare clinicians and have their medical license information and board certifications display on their academic profiles. We would like to be able to display this information in the researcher profiles as well. We would want the researcher or their delegates to maintain and enter this information, as it is not part of our central directory.

   Examples: https://medicine.uiowa.edu/internalmedicine/profile/christina-charis-donelson

   https://medicine.uiowa.edu/neurology/profile/daniel-tranel

   https://uihc.org/kimberly-leman

   https://medicine.uiowa.edu/eye/profile/val-sheffield

   https://education.uiowa.edu/person/saba-rasheed-ali

   3 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   Under Review  ·  1 comment  ·  Researcher Profiles  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

9. Expose Researcher Engagement types via API and Analytics

   We wanted to start developing a Find a Supervisor page on our web site using the researcher API.
   We have entered Principal Supervisor, Co-supervisor etc as engagement types in the backend. However there is no way to query this via the API or Analytics. Also to search the field you need to search the code not the description e.g. Engagement3 not Principal Supervisor.

   We would like to use the API to have a find a research supervisor page that will query the profiles for researcher interests and return only those reseachers that are approved as research supervisors. The search is specifically for potential Higher degree candidates. We would like to be able to return the results to look similar to the tiles that currently display on the researcher profile portal.

   So the idea is to have the fields required for this API exposed in both analytics and the API.

   We wanted to start developing a Find a Supervisor page on our web site using the researcher API.
   We have entered Principal Supervisor, Co-supervisor etc as engagement types in the backend. However there is no way to query this via the API or Analytics. Also to search the field you need to search the code not the description e.g. Engagement3 not Principal Supervisor.

   We would like to use the API to have a find a research supervisor page that will query the profiles for researcher interests and return only those reseachers that are approved as research supervisors. The search is… more

   9 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

   You have left! (?) (thinking…)
   0 comments  ·  APIs and Integrations  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close
   AdminTami Ezra (Admin, Ex Libris) responded

   Removing the "accepted" status so that institution can continue voting as agreed with the PWG.

10. Configure date types used for searching and filtering in research portal

    Currently, the Date facet in the research portal includes all types of dates associated with an asset (e.g. created, published, submitted, availability). Some of these dates may be used more for administrative purposes (i.e. we use Submitted for when items like ETDs were added to the repository, which may not be related to when the asset was created), and therefore should not be used for filtering search results for users.

    Additionally, because not all of the date types display in the asset details, the search results when using the date facet can be confusing for users. If a user filtered to a certain date range, and results include assets that do not display dates within that range (but do include a date that isn’t displayed), it gives the impression that the date filter did not work correctly.

    We would like for the Dates used for searching and faceting to be configurable for the research portal, specifically to be able to specify what date types are included.

    Currently, the Date facet in the research portal includes all types of dates associated with an asset (e.g. created, published, submitted, availability). Some of these dates may be used more for administrative purposes (i.e. we use Submitted for when items like ETDs were added to the repository, which may not be related to when the asset was created), and therefore should not be used for filtering search results for users.

    Additionally, because not all of the date types display in the asset details, the search results when using the date facet can be confusing for users. If a user filtered… more

    55 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Under Review  ·  1 comment  ·  Research Portal and Publishing  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

11. The 'Pages' field should appear in all asset types

    Hi,
    The "Pages" field appears only in some of the asset types. It should appear in all of them.

    Maya Amichal

    1 vote

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Research Repository  ·  Edit…  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

12. Include researcher proxies in Esploro letters and communications

    Allow repository staff the ability to communicate with researcher proxies regarding deposits. Currently, all letters and communications regarding deposits are sent only to the researcher. In cases where a researcher has appointed a proxy to deposit assets and manage their profile, library staff should have the option to send messages to the appointed proxy instead of or in addition to the researcher. Staff should be able to select this option when approving or returning deposits or using the "Contact Researcher" button. Proxies should also have the option to recieve letters about the researcher accounts they manage.

    6 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Research Repository  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close
    Under Review  ·  AdminAnonymous (Admin, Ex Libris) responded

    
    

13. Add notes that display in Esploro brief record display

    Though many Esploro researcher deposits naturally disappear from the research deposits queue as part of their lifecycle -- approved, returned to researchers, etc. -- for deposits that for one reason or another have to remain in the deposits queue for an extended period, a type of internal note explaining their presence in the brief display would be very helpful.

    In our case, our library does the work of seeking OA permissions for deposits, leaving deposits in the queue awaiting responses for a period of days, weeks, and in rare cases months. As you may imagine, this can build up very quickly, and with no obvious indices why the deposits are still there. We already keep "For follow-up" notes of this type in the records, but we have to click into the record to read them; if this or a similar note could display in the brief display, it would make managing dozens of in-limbo deposits much easier. Thank you!

    Though many Esploro researcher deposits naturally disappear from the research deposits queue as part of their lifecycle -- approved, returned to researchers, etc. -- for deposits that for one reason or another have to remain in the deposits queue for an extended period, a type of internal note explaining their presence in the brief display would be very helpful.

    In our case, our library does the work of seeking OA permissions for deposits, leaving deposits in the queue awaiting responses for a period of days, weeks, and in rare cases months. As you may imagine, this can build up very… more

    13 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Research Repository  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close
    Under Review  ·  AdminAnonymous (Admin, Ex Libris) responded

    
    

14. Allow repository staff to send canned responses

    Allow customers the ability to create and store canned messages that can be used when communicating with researchers. Esploro already offers the ability to create custom return reasons that can be selected when returning a deposit. But this feature would be even more useful if selecting of one of those reasons also sent customizable canned message that could be used to provide further instruction to the researcher on how to modify and resubmit their deposit. It would be useful to have a set of canned messages that could be used when approving a deposit to notify the researcher if any changes were made during staff review, such as the addition of metadata or application of an embargo.

    Allow customers the ability to create and store canned messages that can be used when communicating with researchers. Esploro already offers the ability to create custom return reasons that can be selected when returning a deposit. But this feature would be even more useful if selecting of one of those reasons also sent customizable canned message that could be used to provide further instruction to the researcher on how to modify and resubmit their deposit. It would be useful to have a set of canned messages that could be used when approving a deposit to notify the researcher if any… more

    3 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Research Repository  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close
    Under Review  ·  AdminAnonymous (Admin, Ex Libris) responded

    
    

15. Unpaywall OAI-PMH Output

    Here at RMIT University, we would like to make available our open access repository content to Unpaywall. https://unpaywall.org/

    In order to do this, Unpaywall have advised us of two changes that need to be made to our OAI-PMH output to enable harvesting by them.
    Firstly, they require us to configure our OAI-PMH to include clear identifications of the versions of the attached open access files, i.e.. Published Version, Accepted Manuscript and Submitted Version.
    These descriptions are used in our current Esploro Repository instance and it would be ideal if these could be included in our OAI-PMH output. Unpaywall have recommended this be structured as follows:

    <dc:type>publishedVersion/dc:type
    when you have verified that the PDF you are hosting is the version of record, with all publisher copyediting and formatting.

    <dc:type>acceptedVersion/dc:type
    when you have verified that the PDF you are hosting meets this definition of acceptedVersion.

    <dc:type>submittedVersion/dc:type
    when you know the PDF you are hosting does NOT meet the definitions for publishedVersion or acceptedVersion (for example if it was uploaded before the paper was accepted for publication)

    Secondly, Unpaywall advised us to make harvest of our content possible, the OAI-PMH component of the repository to include PDF URLs for all Esploro Repository records that have them.

    Unpaywall will harvest those records that have both an open access file attached and a DOI registered in Crossref.org and this will serve to significantly promote our repository content and increase the opportunity to increase impact of our researcher's publications.

    Thanks
    Keely

    Here at RMIT University, we would like to make available our open access repository content to Unpaywall. https://unpaywall.org/

    In order to do this, Unpaywall have advised us of two changes that need to be made to our OAI-PMH output to enable harvesting by them.
    Firstly, they require us to configure our OAI-PMH to include clear identifications of the versions of the attached open access files, i.e.. Published Version, Accepted Manuscript and Submitted Version.
    These descriptions are used in our current Esploro Repository instance and it would be ideal if these could be included in our OAI-PMH output. Unpaywall have recommended… more

    16 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Planned  ·  1 comment  ·  Research Portal and Publishing  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

16. Tagging Selected Outputs in Esploro

    1.0 Proposal to tag or highlight selected outputs

    We would like to explore the possibility of “tagging” (or similar demarcation) selected outputs in Esploro to differentiate / highlight them.

    This tagging will be additional to the current search / refine options (such as Research Unit or Subject).
    All forms of outputs (articles, data sets etc) should be eligible for tagging.

    For example, we may want to “tag” Covid-19 research papers and data, or other key research on particular themes or goals.

    Ideally, there should also be an option of sub-tagging eg. a main tag, and a sub-tag (ie. the option of a tag hierarchy)
    (For example. Tag: Research Themes – identifies that the paper belongs to one of our core research themes
    Sub-Tag: Digital Economy – identifies which research theme the paper belongs to)

    2.0 How tagged items should function
    Initially, we would like to explore how these tagged items should be visible / share-able in three ways:

    2.1 The tagged items should be added as an option to the Refine Results

    2.2 We would like the option to add a button (s) to the front page of the repository to enable users to navigate directly to the tagged outputs (eg a “Covid-19” button).

    2.3 These options should enable us to create a URL direct to these tagged options to enable users to go directly to these tagged outputs from other webpages.

    3.0 How will the outputs be tagged?
    We would like to explore two routes to tagging selected outputs:

    3.1 By periodic, retrospective mass-tagging
    As we have the DOIs of the outputs to be tagged, could we (the Library) conduct a retrospective, periodic “mass-tagging” / upload / similar (say, every 3 months) in which the outputs to be tagged are tagged in-bulk (by matching DOIs).

    3.2 When outputs are entered onto Esploro
    There should also be an option to tag an output at the point of upload / record creation in Esploro

    1.0 Proposal to tag or highlight selected outputs

    We would like to explore the possibility of “tagging” (or similar demarcation) selected outputs in Esploro to differentiate / highlight them.

    This tagging will be additional to the current search / refine options (such as Research Unit or Subject).
    All forms of outputs (articles, data sets etc) should be eligible for tagging.

    For example, we may want to “tag” Covid-19 research papers and data, or other key research on particular themes or goals.

    Ideally, there should also be an option of sub-tagging eg. a main tag, and a sub-tag (ie. the option… more

    • 

    8 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Research Portal and Publishing  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

17. Add job to bulk import asset metadata and files

    Currently there is actually no mechanism by which a batch of metadata and files for multiple assets can be imported into Esploro. Strongly recommend adding this functionality ASAP.

    34 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    5 comments  ·  Research Repository  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close
    Under Review  ·  AdminAnonymous (Admin, Ex Libris) responded

    This Idea is very broad, and since it was opened new functionality has been added, in particular the Update by CSV. CSV update covers all metadata fields in the Asset but does not include Authors, either creators or contributors, or Files. 

    It would be helpful to get an updated list of priorities.

    
    

18. Improve version control of research assets

    Research outputs typically go through several different iterations or versions over the course of their lifecycle. NISO, for example, defines up to seven versions of scholarly journal articles http://www.niso.org/publications/niso-rp-8-2008-jav. In order to avoid confusion, support proper citation, and ensure compliance with publisher open access policies, it is critically important that institutional repositories clearly distinguish between different versions of the same work by prominently displaying this information in both the asset record and PDF cover sheet.

    Esploro currently offers two options for communicating version: asset type and file type.

    Asset type refers to the type of resource being deposited. When categorizing asset types, Esploro distinguishes between “Publications” and “Posted Content”. “Publications” refer to published works such as journal articles, book chapters, conference proceedings, etc. “Posted Content” refers to works that have not been formally published, which Esploro defines as working papers, preprints, and accepted manuscripts. Each asset can be assigned only one asset type. Asset type values are predefined and not customizable.

    File type is used to describe the individual files or external links associated with an asset. The list of default values consists of a mix of terms used to indicate format (text, image, audio, video) and version (preprint, submitted, accepted, published, correction). Unlike asset type, however, file type values are customizable. Although choosing a file type is not required for deposit, this is the field Esploro uses to display version information on PDF cover sheets.

    We believe the overlapping use of asset type and file type to capture version information is a potential source of confusion and data inconsistency. For example, if a researcher wishes to deposit an article that has been accepted for publication, should they deposit it as an "Accepted Manuscript" or as a "Journal Article" with the file type "Accepted"? Either is possible but having two ways to deposit the same work will likely confuse researchers. This inconsistency also creates problems for discovery and analytics. For example, if a user wanted to obtain a list of all preprints, they would only retrieve those defined at the asset level as opposed to the file level. Meanwhile, version information only appears on cover sheets if it specified at the file level. Avoiding this confusion seems to require a single, consistent model for representing versions in Esploro.

    Ultimately, we don’t think it makes sense to manage version as an asset type or a file type; it is neither. Instead, we recommend version be managed as a completely separate field. When a researcher deposits an asset, they should be prompted to select the version of the asset being deposited. This information should be prominently displayed in both the asset record and cover sheet and be queryable in Analytics.

    We further recommend that Esploro allow researchers to submit new versions of previously deposited works. Different versions of the same work should either be FRBRized or displayed in a way that directs users from superseded version(s) to the current preferred version.

    i. When depositing an asset, prompt researchers to indicate if the asset is a new version of a previously deposited work.

    ii. If the asset is a new version, allow the researcher to select the previous version from a list of their previously deposited assets.

    iii. After the previous version has been selected, a) auto-populate the deposit form with the metadata from the previous version, and b) automatically link the old and new versions via the appropriate relationships (is new version of / is previous version of).

    iv. Once the new version has been approved, either a) FRBRize all versions with the latest as the preferred record, or b) exclude the previous version from search indexing (but continue to allow it to be accessible via DOI) and add a prominent note notifying users that this version has been superseded and directing them to the latest version.

    To summarize, we believe the following enhancements would significantly improve version control in Esploro.

    1) Create a single, dedicated, and prominently displayed field for version

    2) Allow researchers to easily deposit new versions of previously deposited works

    3) FRBRize different versions of the same work OR provide some mechanism for identifying and directing user to the latest or preferred version of a work

    Research outputs typically go through several different iterations or versions over the course of their lifecycle. NISO, for example, defines up to seven versions of scholarly journal articles http://www.niso.org/publications/niso-rp-8-2008-jav. In order to avoid confusion, support proper citation, and ensure compliance with publisher open access policies, it is critically important that institutional repositories clearly distinguish between different versions of the same work by prominently displaying this information in both the asset record and PDF cover sheet.

    Esploro currently offers two options for communicating version: asset type and file type.

    Asset type refers to the type of resource being deposited. When… more

    31 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Research Repository  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close
    AdminTami Ezra (Admin, Ex Libris) responded

    Removing the "accepted" status so that institution can continue voting as agreed with the PWG.

19. Add a creation date to the summary asset record

    In order to manipulate and identify files for individual or batch processing, the display of the asset record creation date in the summary asset record would be very useful.
    I've attached an image of the existing summary asset record. At present, only an 'Asset last updated' field is included. It would be a logical next step to display when the record was created.

    •  

    7 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Research Repository  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close
    Under Review  ·  AdminAnonymous (Admin, Ex Libris) responded

    
    

20. Improve Grant discovery in Research Portal

    We want to work with our Grants Office to track funding acquired by researchers. However, the only way to access grant information is through individual researcher profiles. I believe we can publish Analytics reports for grants to a public webpage in the meantime, but it would be nice to link grants to specific researcher profiles since we are already tracking this information.

    Enhancement request: Add the ability to view Grants in the Esploro interface. This might include 1) a tab for Grants that shows a results page for grants, linked to Researcher profiles, with limiters for Org Unit, Grant Category, and Funding Agency, 2) grants should also be searchable in the main search box.

    We want to work with our Grants Office to track funding acquired by researchers. However, the only way to access grant information is through individual researcher profiles. I believe we can publish Analytics reports for grants to a public webpage in the meantime, but it would be nice to link grants to specific researcher profiles since we are already tracking this information.

    Enhancement request: Add the ability to view Grants in the Esploro interface. This might include 1) a tab for Grants that shows a results page for grants, linked to Researcher profiles, with limiters for Org Unit, Grant Category,… more

    7 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    1 vote 2 votes 3 votes Remove votes

    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    3 comments  ·  Research Portal and Publishing  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close