<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Institutional repositories and RePEc</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.repec.org/2009/01/10/institutional-repositories-and-repec/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.repec.org/2009/01/10/institutional-repositories-and-repec/</link>
	<description>Information about Research Papers in Economics (RePEc)</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 May 2013 15:56:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cororami (@cororami)</title>
		<link>http://blog.repec.org/2009/01/10/institutional-repositories-and-repec/#comment-2789</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Cororami (@cororami)]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Apr 2013 22:39:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.repec.org/?p=130#comment-2789</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Dear Repec, are there any updates regarding institutional repositories and Repec integration?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear Repec, are there any updates regarding institutional repositories and Repec integration?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Christian Zimmermann</title>
		<link>http://blog.repec.org/2009/01/10/institutional-repositories-and-repec/#comment-241</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Christian Zimmermann]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:35:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.repec.org/?p=130#comment-241</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[O. Stephens: That would obviously be a good solution for some, but not others. The format that RePEc uses is extremely simple, thus manageable by people with little skills. It also has the advantage of being very stable. It has not changed in 12 years. 

RePEc could also accept multiple formats. But that means that they need to be converted anyway for the metadata to be used. One should note that RePEc is pretty much defined by the format it uses, as that is the only thing that binds this informal organization. Finally, the philosophy of RePEc has always been that the cost of data entry is borne by the publishers, who are those that benefit most from RePEc. We have no in house resources that can help them beyond what volunteers contribute. So ultimately, it is all a question of finding volunteers to do what you want.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>O. Stephens: That would obviously be a good solution for some, but not others. The format that RePEc uses is extremely simple, thus manageable by people with little skills. It also has the advantage of being very stable. It has not changed in 12 years. </p>
<p>RePEc could also accept multiple formats. But that means that they need to be converted anyway for the metadata to be used. One should note that RePEc is pretty much defined by the format it uses, as that is the only thing that binds this informal organization. Finally, the philosophy of RePEc has always been that the cost of data entry is borne by the publishers, who are those that benefit most from RePEc. We have no in house resources that can help them beyond what volunteers contribute. So ultimately, it is all a question of finding volunteers to do what you want.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ostephens</title>
		<link>http://blog.repec.org/2009/01/10/institutional-repositories-and-repec/#comment-240</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[ostephens]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 11:13:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.repec.org/?p=130#comment-240</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Surely it would be more efficient to change RePEc to consume some standard, commonly used, formats, rather than get every single repository to output in a format unique to RePEc?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Surely it would be more efficient to change RePEc to consume some standard, commonly used, formats, rather than get every single repository to output in a format unique to RePEc?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
