Desarrollo de servicios para repositorios en el Reino Unido: el proyecto UK RepositoryNet+ | ThinkEPI

[From Google's English] "After late and 'Declaration of the Alhambra' (May 2010), continue to arrive these days from Spain news about new statements in support of open access institutional level. While not completely devoid of useful-especially if it results in a better allocation of human and technical resources for teams trying to implement the objectives set out in these texts-these statements are meaningless if they are limited to being mere expressions of support for a initiative about to celebrate ten years since its launch ^{in January} .  Once as a result of the work of many professionals in university libraries and research centers around the world has reached a degree of consolidation of the network of open access repositories that does not support turning back, the next step is to venture into the development of services on that infrastructure layer that meet the needs of academics and researchers and their institutions. This is the spirit that has guided the evolution of the project UK RepositoryNet + in the UK ^{in February} , which describes itself as "an initiative to create an infrastructure socio-technical support tank, healing and diffusion in open access research literature ".  Much has been said in this last year of the "erroneous British government's commitment to a model of open access unsustainable 'gold' ( gold open access ) funded by article processing fees deducted, the meager budgets available for research. " Without claiming that this statement is completely wrong, it should also take into account the substantial investment (with seven-digit figures in pounds sterling) performed simultaneously in an investigation of the process of consolidation of the Parkway and open access repositories unparalleled in Europe ^{in March} through this project RepNet , barely mentioned in heated arguments against 'Gold vs. Green' that are taking place for some time in the distribution lists of discipline.  This is due mainly to the fact that, given the simplicity of a particular open access policy that is easy to judge and approve or condemn, the analysis of a project as complex as RepNet requires a thorough understanding of the technical challenges posed by different repository services and approaches to solve them by their development teams. Thus, although virtually absent from the often-Byzantine-discussions between open access advocates, RepNet on the other hand has been much discussed and debated by the community "repository managers" in the UK, which is responsible for implementing the often changing, if not contradictory, policies emanating from the various administrative authorities at the institutional, regional or national.  As presented on the homepage of the project, the development of services on the repository layer is based on a preliminary analysis of the needs of different stakeholders (institutions, funding agencies, researchers ...) and on the definition of a number of areas of work in which it is imperative to provide new functionality to ensure continued open access repositories in a time that demands to meet the requirements of scientific information provision raises the Research Excellence Framework(REF) -the scientific evaluation exercise will take place in the UK in 2014 - mean that many institutions have chosen to purchase and implement CRIS systems, which often threaten to replace open access repositories, although based on an approach much more focused on the management of scientific data in open access as such ⁴ ."