Raw Data: What do you see as VIVO’s top goals in the next 2-3 years?
| Data integration and standardization across multiple systems - Cerif, ORCID, ScienCV, Profiles, LOKI, etc. | Key partnerships with outside community | Aligning each VIVO instance's extensions, data across the consortium, and its reuse in other applications | |
| Having a closer partnership with each VIVO instance | Quality ontology/standards management and development for a better integration into the software stack (or for other applications as well). | Ingest – select (or develop) an entry-level ingest tool and thoroughly support its use with tutorials, examples, and workshops. | |
Core – continue to improve modularity, with plug-and-play triple-stores and reasoners. | Core – lower the bar to entry with a binary distribution; no database, no Ant, no Tomcat, no Vagrant, just a Java runtime required. | Outreach – convey usability, maturity, and coherence in all aspects of web presence. Crowdsourcing will not accomplish this. | |
| A stable community built and supported ontology. VIVO needs to build a larger and more stable ontology community that is in sync with downstream consumers of VIVO data. For example, Profiles RNS sites still exist emitting data in 1.4 ontology. What is the future of their data? | More data out. The community needs to give more effort into producing ( or facilitating the production of ) secondary data sets that are useable by administrative folks (aka donors, funders) and academics alike. Dave Eichmann at IOWA is doing a great job of this using harvested VIVO data. | More developers. VIVO needs more developers. VIVO needs to work on getting in tune with the preferred working methods of the cohort of probable developers in the communities that seem to be attracting themselves to VIVO. This may require surveying or reaching out to this group about this particular topic. | |
Make and easy to install, default configuration, application- reduce flexibility and increase simplicity Increase the number of adopters worldwide, including lead institutions that can set an example for others and contribute to the project | Expand the community to be more inclusive, democratic, and diversified so can start building a robust community source project | Clearer articulation of the value proposition to the academic community | |
| Better marketing and branding, not only of the product(s) but of the community's vision | More complete and accessible documentation | Streamlined web presence; straightforward, timely communications that can be easily understood by prospective users or contributors | |
| A software release process that's driven not by incremental improvements desired by existing users but by exciting and useful new features that can capture the imagination and energy of new adopters | To develop a VIVO search tool, to expand our capabilities to support new VIVO implementations and to add/improve features like CVs, visualizations, embedded content and other cool "gadgets" | Increased open source commiter activity on the Vitro and VIVO projects, e.g. coordination of more code sprints and hackathons. | |
Releasing VIVO Search or supporting a similar solution like DIRECT2Experts. | Providing input for use case driven evolution of the VIVO-ISF data standard. | Increased adoption by universities and research institutions, e.g. having more than 100 active VIVO implementations in production. | |
Transforming an informal network of committed individuals into a sustainable community offering transparent governance, the capability to deliver production-quality software and ontology, and an openness to new ideas and directions | Communicating where we are as a community, what we offer, and how we can partner with other organizations and movements to achieve goals such as shared identifiers and data interoperability | Attracting new contributors (financial and in-kind) to the community by broadening VIVO’s reach in the sciences and biomedicine, in the humanities, and in libraries through closer integration with DuraSpace’s other communities supporting research data and repository technologies | |
| Achieving performance optimisations | A more modular software structure where user developed functionality could more easily be plugged into the software build | Strengthen the open technical community and provide more training and "VIVO in the wild" showcases (e.g. it seems hard still to find out who is running instances at their institutions, which increases the difficulty of understanding who is doing what and who to ask to come out and play) | |
| A key strength of the technology is the distribution (federation) of data ... this needs more attention in the beginning with stronger and more compelling demonstrations of that strength (this is particularly a problem when you don't know who is running VIVO) | Expanding the core services beyond the university faculty/staff information use case. | Increased adoption | |
Progress on VIVO search | Researcher personalisation: allowing some look and feel choice (citation style etc) | SEO (how to get as much traffic as an academia.edu/ research gate ) | |
| Uptake: -> increase in new Universities using VIVO platforms | Getting VIVO search up and running | More contributions to both the software and ontology from community members who are using the platform to solve real information problems and deliver services. | |
| Clearer communication of community activities ( user documentation, software release schedule, working groups, etc) so that active members know where things are headed and potential members can learn about activities. | Clearer communication of VIVO's value proposition over other systems or data model in this space. | Encouraging the release and development of community developed tools and software to support VIVO implementations.^^^ | |
