Open Access Technical Workshop – ‘Un-Report’

Hello All,

Here is the ‘un-report’ from our 4th April event looking at system functionality for Open Access.  It mainly consists of informal notes and verbatim comments from the day.

OpenAccessTechnicalWorkshop Un-Report_20160404

We will  be following this up at the final programme workshop around systems and metadata.  The date and venue will be announced soon.

The presentations can be seen here:




Hydra and Fedora

Jisc Monitor


Jisc – Sherpa REF and Publications Router

PURE – discussion was online on an instance of PURE –  see the ‘un-report’ where there are lots of comments.



Update from Glasgow

Hello All,

Our latest activity includes:

  1. Addition of a few fields to our open access tab on EPrints – code will be shared
  2. Amending our College reports from EPrints to include REF exceptions now that these are real – code will be shared
  3. Creating a community issue log to save re-inventing the wheel on open access issues – perhaps a peer site has already come up with a great answer or as a community we can solve an issue or refer it to the appropriate body?

Open Access Technical Workshop

Open Access Technical Workshop



4th April  saw the  End-to-End and LOCH projects host a joint event at Glasgow’s Hilton Grosvenor Hotel to look at technical issues related to Open Access policy compliance for the REF.  The morning session consisted of a series of short ‘show-and-tell’ sessions whereby participants generously gave up their time to demonstrate how the repository and research information systems they use can support the new requirements, which came into play on Friday 1st April 2016.

After lunch, delegates joined groups looking at technical issues in PURE and DSpace.  Another group discussed some of the non-technical issues to do with REF policy and OA funding and spent time sharing experiences and best practice.  The day was rounded off with presentations about CASRAI, SHERPA-REF and Jisc Publications Router.

The organisers are in the process of writing up a more thorough report, to be published on the LOCH and End-to-End blogs in the next couple of weeks.

Open Access Work Recognised

I’m very pleased to say that the University of Glasgow Library has been shortlisted for Outstanding Library Team in the Times Higher Education Leadership and Management Awards

Our submission was based on our open access and research data managements services, the continuous redevelopment of the building including the High Demand Collection, and  innovative services such as ReadingLists @ Glasgow.

I notice our colleagues in Kent, Southampton, and Lancaster also have been shortlisted in other categories.

Open Access Technical Workshop – Lancaster’s Experience

Today, I and Louise Tripp from Lancaster University attended the Open Access workshop organised by Jisc funded E2EOA and LOCH Good Practice pathfinder projects. Lancaster University is a partner in the E2EOA project.

The day started with a short introduction by Valerie McCutcheon (University of Glasgow, E2EOA) followed immediately by systems demonstrations session led by Dominic Tate (University of Edinburgh, LOCH). The systems demonstrations were quick and to the point, and included a wide variety of vendor and institutional presentations. The systems demonstrated were Pure, Converis, Elements, EPrints, DSpace, Fedora/Hydra, and Jisc Monitor. Out of these, we presented on our Fedora/Hydra work under the E2EOA project and how that fits in with the wider RIOXX and RIOXX+ metadata. We also talked about RIOXX mapping in RDF within Fedora/Hydra and RIOXX RDF playground, work on which has been done by Adrian Albin-Clark (Lancaster University). After these short demonstrations, there was an open discussion about commonalities in demands and issues about these systems. Key commonalities included interoperability between systems, OAI-PMH interfaces and ability to generate OA compliance reports.

This session was followed by a lovely hot lunch which allowed lots of networking opportunities. I had a very useful conversation with George MacGregor from University of Strathclyde from the viewpoint of Linked Data and Semantic Web, and how we are using many controlled vocabularies in Hydra as well as integrating DBpedia within systems, including Primo. Similarly, another useful conversation happened with Balviar Notay of Jisc about the importance of Fedora/Hydra in the future and in terms of the newly developing UK partnership between several institutions on this. More details on this partnership to come later.

After lunch were the breakout sessions on three key themes. These were decided by the participants on the day and were on the topics of Pure (led by Manya Buchan of Elsevier), DSpace (led by Claire Knowles of University of Edinburgh) and Non-system Open Access issues (led by Dominic Tate of University of Edinburgh). As we are a Pure customer, both Louise and I participated in the Pure theme. We found the session to be very useful, informative and learnt a lot about reporting in Pure in a short space of time. The capability of sharing OA template reports was highly appreciated and Manya will be generating and publicising some of these to the Pure User Group shortly. Another thing that people appreciated was the capability of highlighting certain fields as we have done at Lancaster University (see Figure 1). This allows our academics to only input the absolute minimal information we expect from them visibly and clearly. We have now shared how we have done this with Manya with the intention that it will be shared further within the Pure User Group.

Highlighting key fields in Pure

There were several discussions on the theme of interoperability with Pure as well as OA reporting. Some issues and concerns were also raised by the customers as well as Elsevier, many of which were known bugs and are about to be fixed. However, there was a reassurance across the board that Pure can do a lot of things for us that many other systems are not able to do at this time. I should also take this opportunity to mention that I chair the UK Pure interoperability working group so if you have any concerns or comments, please let me know.

The breakout sessions concluded with a lovely cup of tea and lots of sugary treats to keep us going for another hour. The last part of the day was focussed on CASRAI UK (led by Valerie McCutcheon), Sherpa REF plugin (Balviar Notay) and Jisc Publications Router (led by Balviar Notay and Hannah DeGroff). Details of call to join CASRAI-UK chapter are available here. Lancaster University have already indicated an interest to be part of this chapter and we would encourage other institutions to also consider joining. A good news about Sherpa REF plugin is that they have acknowledged the issues and concerns of institutions in relation to acceptance vs publication messages and are keen to accommodate institutions needs. There was an open call for feedback which can be provided by clicking on the official Sherpa REF website. Jisc Publications Router looked a lot more mature than when I last looked at it about 8 months ago. The website is clear and modern, highlighting information on how institutions can get involved as well as how the technical developers can work with it. The key concern here was again from Pure side. Considering that Pure does not support OAI-PMH harvesting or SWORD2, would Pure customers be able to benefit from Publications Router? This is where Balviar and Hannah mentioned the API for Publications Router which is another way to work with the information. The outgoing notification API looks very good and I am sure Elsevier can pick this up and work with it without many problems.

This concluded a very useful day. We are now hoping to organise another half a day session with Manya on reporting for Open Access/RDM (more like a Reporting 101). If you are interested in attending, please let me know and I will let you know when we are advertising the event more widely.

Case Study Open Access in EPrints

Our case study has just been published:

McCutcheon, V and Eadie, M, Managing open access with EPrints software: a case study, Insights, 2016, 29(1), 45–52; DOI:



Open Access Technical Workshop 4th April

Our next workshop is now advertised:

Can’t make it?  Don’t worry we will share a summary of the day.



Update from Glasgow

Well our open access mailbox is getting very very busy now – great – lots of work – but a nice feeling that we are hopefully we are reducing the admin burden for authors.

We had a lovely visit from colleagues at the University of Osaka earlier in the week as they are interested in hearing how UK Universities are supporting open access.  They have also visited Edinburgh so will have two nicely contrasting but complimentary case studies to consider.

Library of Glasgow U.

We are checking our Wellcome Trust papers as some were listed as not being compliant.  We have been able to find sensible responses for most cases and look forward to resolving any outstanding issues.

We continue to do more talks and presentations e.g. a session this week at the annual Research Conference.

More Sharing of Best Practice….and Donuts

We had a great meeting with colleagues at St Andrews this week.  We spoke about open access processes and research data management in some detail.   And we ate the most delicious cakes…


We have some differences in policy but broadly similar processes.

We agreed to follow up with an even more detailed look at financial processes to see if we could identify further efficiencies and to compare presentations and standard messages.

There was broad agreement that the CASRAI UK process might faciliate better communications between stakeholders as often issues arise due to misunderstanding of terminology.

We both tend to record other University awards in additional information and look forward to better ways to store and re-use this information.

Thank you for the lovely donuts.


Sharing Best Practice

We have spent the afternoon here with Dominic Tate from our sister Pathfinder Project LOCHS

Apart from our geographical proximity our projects share elements of technical solutions for Open Access.

Today we compared processes.  The structure and work division are very different.  The principles and systems are very similar.

Neither site currently mandate forwarding of author’s acceptance email for storage as evidence of date of acceptance.  Both often receive these.  Edinburgh sometimes save the email as a closed document in the repository.  Glasgow retain emails in the email system.

We discussed better evidence that the correct version rather than just ‘a’ version was uploaded to the repository.

We were both concerned with reaching all authors and ensuring they knew about requirements for the next Research Excellence Framework Exercise.  We agreed – use all and any channels, get University leaders to advertise this.

We had both developed similar compliance checks and reports for Colleges and are looking forward to comparing notes again in a few months to see what else we can share and what the early data is telling us.