« 00048 · Edit Form · 00050 »

Summary: Adding to affiliation tree or use keywords?
Type: Policy

Priority (1<5) = 3
Status: Assigned

Raised by: hal
Project: CORE Organic
Related to
Date opened: 2005–09–07
Assigned to Ilse Rasmussen
Hours used (estimates in brackets) =
Date closed:

Description:
3.8.2011: Ilse to put into the help text
31.8.2010: Comment by Julia Meier and Helga Willer: The description from Hugo below should be included into the instructions (Help, Short version?).

When should we add categories (organisations, projects) to the research affiliation tree and when should we use keywords?

1. Adding to the tree gives a ‘folder’ in the browse views where all eprints from an organisation or project can be seen.
2. But the affiliation tree is becoming very large, which
   • makes it more difficult to overview
   • slows the system down when the tree is shown
3. Using keywords to identify e.g. a project within an organisation (the Swiss style) enables searches that include all eprints within that or project.
   • But the eprints for all projects are shown together in the organisation ‘folder’ in the browse tree

A possible policy in this regard is to only make separate categories/’folder’ in the research affiliation tree for larger organisations and projects where several eprints are expected.