Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

I. Problem/Value Statement

Problem Statement:
The engine driving the Image Delivery Service, Luratech, is out of date, expensive licensed software, no longer supported by the vendor, not IIIF compliant, and needs to be replaced. In addition, the UI functionality and look-and-feel for IDS is out of date and lags behind the developments in other DRS delivery services.

Business Value: Improved and up-to-date technical infrastructure that eliminates and prevents technical debt, improved functionality for users. This will be a partial migration to an open source image server, with the potential for lowering license maintenance costs for current IDS servers and for deploying additional instances of the image delivery server to meet scalability requirements in the future.

II. Vision and Approach

Describe the solution: Evaluate Luratech replacement alternatives and implement one. Redesign and update the UI to respond to user requested functionality and bring IDS in line with other DRS delivery services

Deliverables/Work Products: New version of IDS that is compatible with the IIIF image api 2.0.  New version of the IDS user interface.

Define how to measure “done”: Luratech engine has been replaced and UI has been updated to match Library Viewer and SDS.

In Scope: TBD upon evaluation by Chip and Janet

Out of Scope (for medium and large projects): TBD upon evaluation by Chip and Janet

III. Stakeholders/People

Who is the work being done for? (Sponsor): Franziska Frey

What organizations, departments, or people will benefit from this work (for medium and large projects) Harvard Library and users of library image collections, especially IIIF consumers

Who is funding the work? LTS

Who will accept the work?

Who is the project manager? Abigail Bordeaux

Who will be involved in doing the work (service area, department, etc …)? [Include name, project role, and estimated percentage of time per month for the project duration]

Resource NameRole(s)Monthly Time Estimate
RandyLTS oversight, development director10%
JulieAnalyst, Documentation30%
KateLibrary advisor<5%
ToddLibrary advisor<5%

IV. Schedule and Cost


Architecture requirements


  • No labels