[SCC_Active_Members] RE: SCC Deliverables and choice of a SW base for the CHM repository

[H.M. Gladney]

Re: "Why should CHM actually be the service provider for hosting the
collection?"  I do not know that it should be, except that it is not
traditional for a museum or library to contract out the holding of its
collection.  What other cultural archives have contracted out their
repositories.  (This is a consideration that did not arise in the discussion
at either the December or January SCC meetings.)

Even if the core of the repository were held in one or more (replication for
the usual reasons, etc.) external repositories, would not some repository
front end still be required for CHM special aspects?  (See the attached
diagram, which reminds us that the word 'repository' is ambiguous, denoting
at least three different levels.

Re "How big do expect the entire collection to be, within the next 3-4
years?"  I have no idea of the collection size, perhaps because I am a SCC
'newbie'.  However, I doubt that it is among the high priority things that
will influence decisions for this topic, given the low price of storage
space and supporting hardware.

Cheerio, HMG 
-----Original Message-----
From: Larry Masinter [mailto:LMM at acm.org] 
Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 2:10 PM
To: 'H.M. Gladney'
Subject: RE: [SCC_Active_Members] SCC Deliverables and choice of a SW base
for the CHM repository

Maybe I missed something.

Why should CHM actually be the service provider for hosting the collection?

Instead, consider hosting copies at Internet Archives, Google, Yahoo, and a
others who offer file sharing services.

How big do expect the entire collection to be, within the next
3-4 years?

Larry