As part of the Mellon-funded AIMS project, the Universities of Virginia, Hull, Stanford and Yale have spent the last two years exploring the ramifications and distinct requirements of born digital archival materials in libraries. This presentation focuses on the partners’ research and prototyping of tools, infrastructure and workflows necessary to provide an end-to-end environment for born digital archival materials.
Keyword:
Grants, DLF Forum 2011, Hydra, and Archives
Subject:
Hydra Project
Creator:
Dushay, Naomi, Meloni, Julie, Cramer, Tom, Olson, Michael, and Daigle, Bradley
Contributor:
Yale University, Andrew W Mellon Foundation, University of Virginia, and Stanford University
A presentation given at the Open Repositories conference in 2010. In part, the proposal reads and While repositories provide obvious benefits in hosting and managing content, it is equally clear that there is no “one size fits all” solution to the range of digital asset management needs at a typical institution, much less across institutions. A system that supports the submission, approval and dissemination of electronic theses and dissertations, for example, has demonstrably different requirements than a digitization workflow solution, an e-science data repository, or media preservation and access system. There is a clear need in the repository community to readily develop and deploy content-, domain-, and institution-specific solutions that integrate the flexibility and richness of customized applications and workflows with the underlying power of repositories for content management, access and preservation. This paper will provide an overview of Hydra’s philosophy, architecture, and components, as well as demonstrations of various Hydra installations. The paper will also provide a progress report on Hydra development to date and its overall roadmap, as well as provide observations on the successes and challenges of community-based development of shared repository solutions.
Keyword:
Community, Open Repositories 2010, Architecture, Repository, and Hydra
Subject:
Hydra Project
Creator:
Sadler, Bess, Sigmon, Tim, Mene, Willy, Green, Richard A, Staples, Thornton, McRae, Lynn, Cramer, Tom, and Awre, Christopher L
Contributor:
University of Hull, DuraSpace, University of Virginia, and Stanford University
GeoConcerns is a plugin to CurationConcerns for managing geospatial resources in a repository (http, A presentation at Hydra Connect 2016 described thus, and //geoconcerns.github.io). This presentation will give an overview and demonstration of GeoConcerns’ features and PCDM-based data model. In addition, we will discuss the code base and future development work such as integration with Sufia. An audio recording of the session is available for download below.
Keyword:
Geodata, Connect 2016, Hydra, and Portland Common Data Model (PCDM)
A proposal for a presentation given at the Open Repositories conference in 2015 held in Indianapolis described thus, One of the many successes of the Hydra community is the fundamental notion from which its name is derived—the concept of many interfaces (“heads”) over top of a single repository (the “body”). The recent release of Fedora 4, with its internal RDF-centric model, has spurred efforts for a community-wide model of collections and works, such that the heads can be sure that the body will behave as they expect it to. That model has been designed and vetted by the Hydra community, and its architecture and initial implementations will be presented in this paper. [Note, and the subject of this proposal has since become known as the 'Portland Common Data Model'.]
Keyword:
Community, Data model, Resource Description Framework (RDF), Hydra, Portland Common Data Model (PCDM), Open Repositories 2015, and Fedora
Subject:
Hydra Project
Creator:
Stroop, Jon, Sanderson, Rob, and Cowles, Esmé
Contributor:
University of California San Diego, Princeton University, and Stanford University
Open source software isn’t really free. This might seem obvious to some, but there are many members of open source communities that consume rather than contribute, Slides from a panel session given at the Open Repositories conference in 2015 held in Indianapolis described thus, and they use the software but are either unwilling or unable to engage with the community to write code, submit use cases, create documentation, or do any of the other things that make an open source project a success. Fortunately, things don't have to be this way. Over the past two years, the Fedora project has undertaken a great effort to revitalize not only the software but the community itself. By maintaining open, transparent communication, soliciting use cases, development, and testing from community members, and establishing a clear project governance structure, we have laid the groundwork for a successful community source project. At the same time, the Islandora and Hydra communities have pursued similar strategies to build and sustain their own communities and the broader Fedora community. This panel will feature a discussion on the recent successes of the Fedora community and future plans to continue raising the level of community engagement and project ownership.
Keyword:
Community, Collaboration, Islandora, Hydra, Open Repositories 2015, and Fedora
Subject:
Hydra Project
Creator:
Ruest, Nick, Wilcox, David, and Cramer, Tom
Contributor:
York University, DuraSpace, and Stanford University
For the past few years I've been distributing a survey to gauge usage of Sufia (and, this year, CurationConcerns) and to get a sense of what direction the community wants the components to go in. I'd like to report back to you all on what the latest data says, and share a rough roadmap for 2016-2017. A video of this session is available at the 'Related URL' below. and A lightning talk presentation at Hydra Connect 2016, described thus