Here are the conclusions I drew after evaluating Greenstone Digital Library Software.
Overall, this evaluation has examined the utility of Greenstone Digital Library Software for the creation of a digital repository at the University of Western Ontario. As a large, academic institution, Western has many factors to consider when choosing appropriate software. Primarily this evaluation focused on how well Greenstone performs in terms of functionality, reliability, usability and support services. In terms of these issues, Greenstone seems to rate fairly successfully. With the exception of preserving metadata, Greenstone appears to function effectively as an open source option for libraries to build their own digital repositories for the benefit and use of administrators and patrons. However, attractive features and ease of use are not all that matters. This evaluation has also highlighted the practical implications Western will have to consider before deciding whether to adopt Greenstone as a software option. Issues of cost, time, staff and support may place limitations on Western’s ability to use Greenstone to meet their objectives. Thus, before selecting any software, Western needs to perform a needs assessment to be certain whatever program they choose is right for them as well as an evaluation of their resources to be sure they have the requirements to use such a program. If practical considerations are not made first it is likely such a venture into open source digital repository software will fail at high cost of time and money for the institution regardless of the quality of the software.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Good conclusion. I think you made a good point that regardless of whether the software is awesome or not the issue of open source software and how the library interacts with or supports it must be addressed. Open source software has significant initial and recurring costs that any library, regardless of size, needs to be bale to accommodates before taking the plunge into the open source ocean.
I like the factors you used in the evaluation (functionality, reliability, usability, support services). Greenstone sounds like an interesting product.
P.S. Go Mustangs! :)
Hey Kristen--
You know? You are the first classmate I've found who has evaluated Greenstone. I chose GS too, and agree with your assessment.
Overall, I like the socially progressive projects that Greenstone enables and supports.
In your conclusion, I like that you emphasize the importance of a community needs assessment (I, sadly, dropped the ball on this point).
Nice work.
Hi Kristen - I also did my evaluation on Greenstone, and really enjoyed surfing my way through lots of digital collections built using the software. Like you, I emphasized the usability and support issue - mainly because I didn't feel all that qualified to comment on nitty-gritty technical issues!
BTW, hear you met my dad a few weeks ago at the WTJHS - small world! my greenstone evaluation was loosely based on the WTJHS actually , since it addressed the use of the software to build a local history archive.
Hi Kristen - I also did my evaluation on Greenstone, and really enjoyed surfing my way through lots of digital collections built using the software. Like you, I emphasized the usability and support issue - mainly because I didn't feel all that qualified to comment on nitty-gritty technical issues!
BTW, hear you met my dad a few weeks ago at the WTJHS - small world! my greenstone evaluation was loosely based on the WTJHS actually , since it addressed the use of the software to build a local history archive.
Post a Comment