Contribute to the DSpace Development Fund
The newly established DSpace Development Fund supports the development of new features prioritized by DSpace Governance. For a list of planned features see the fund wiki page.
Candidate Features for DSpace
Candidate Feature | Exists? (in some form) | Core | Non-core | Survey Average Score* (1 = lowest, 10 = highest) | Use Cases |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Create / manage files and metadata (as an Item) | x | x | 10 | ||
Community and Collection hierarchy (or generic containers) | x | 7.36 | |||
Create new versions of existing Items | (beta) | 5.92 | |||
Support for derivative objects (e.g. thumbnails, coversheets) | x | 6.52 | |||
Metadata for all levels of object hierarchy (e.g. for Communities and Collections) | 6.99 | ||||
Relationships between objects (e.g. Author items as Authors of an Item rather than textual metadata) | 8.17 | ||||
Support for hierarchical metadata formats (e.g. METS / MODS) | 7.10 | ||||
Item approval workflows | x | 7.88 | |||
Item embargo facility | x | 8.64 | |||
Support for flexible licensing, including Creative Commons | x | 8.44 | |||
CRIS functionality (Current Research Information System: researcher pages and automated publication feeds from external data providers) | 5.51 | ||||
Search and browse for Items | x | 9.41 | |||
Easy and intuitive deposit mechanism for users | x | 8.86 | |||
Formula for "Survey Average Score"
The "Survey Average Score" represents average score of all respondents for a single feature from the Vision Survey
- Very Important = 10 points
- Moderately important = 5 points
- Not important = 0 points
So, for example, "Community and Collection Hierarchy" had 50 respondents rank it "Very important" (10 points each), 37 rank it "Moderately important" (5 points each), and 6 rank it "Not important" (0 points).
This is an average score of ((10 x 50) + (5 x 37)) / (50 + 37 + 6) = 7.36 average