Institutional Identifiers in the Journal Supply Chain: Whats Good, Whats Bad, Whats Missing Presente

1
Institutional Identifiersin the Journal Supply
ChainWhats Good, Whats Bad, Whats
MissingPresenter Don ChvatalPresident,
Ringgold, Inc.

• NASIG Strategy Session
• Louisville, June 1-2, 2007

2
Presentation - Content

• 1. Define the Journal Supply Chain
• 2. Show how institutional identifiers can
• -- Help publishers and agents
• -- Save participants time money
• -- Improve user access to information
• 3. Describe JSCEIP
• -- Goal Improve the Supply Chain
• -- Summary of progress, issues

3
Journal Supply Chain - Today

• Publisher

Consortium
Aggregator
Aggregator
Organization
Online Hosting
Online Hosting
Department
Agent
Library
Agent
Individual
4
www.journalsupplychain.org
5
How Ringgold Is Involved

• 1 Identify Publisher audits
• -- 70,000 identifiers 8058 UK institutions
• (29,000 USA1600 CN 500 MX)
• Pilot Project Journal Supply Chain Efficiency
  Improvement Pilot (JSCEIP)
• -- Participants HighWire Press, HighWire
  Press publishers, Swets, British Library
  UK libraries
• -- Test assumptions map the chain etc.

6
JSCEIP Vision(and limits)

• 1. Improve supply chain efficiencies
• -- Service to all components
• 2. Sustainable value propositions
• -- Working business models
• 3. Defined contextual limits and boundaries
• -- Other identifiers DUNS, SAN, ISIL
• -- Granularity within institutions

7
Journal Supply Chain - Fixed
Ringgold Institutional Identifiers

• Publisher

Consortium
Aggregator
Aggregator
Organization
Online Hosting
Online Hosting
Department
Agent
Agent
Library
Affiliated Individual
Independent Individual
8
(No Transcript)
9
(No Transcript)
10
(No Transcript)
11
(No Transcript)
12
(No Transcript)
13
Pilot Project Whats Good

• 1. Publishers have hierarchic subscriber views
• -- Market segmentation metrics
• Customer service improvements
• -- Quicker e-access activations
• -- Codified entitlements
• -- Simplified pricing better deals
• Interoperability between parties
• -- XML messaging
• 4. Pilot is expanding

14
Supply Chain Whats Missing (Bad)

• 1, Few Infrastructure (systems) to support
  exchanges between information owners
• -- At the level of publisher support software
• 2. Working models of information exchange
• -- Pilot Swets/Rockefeller
• 3. Lacking standards for institutional metadata
• 4. Lack of participation by end-user services
• -- ERMS, ILS vendors, Libraries

15
A Proposed Service ModelforCMS Activation
Messaging

• EBSCO THINK Subscription
• ICEDIS eJournal - Proof of Concept

16
EBSCO Proposal Option 1

• Agent sends
• Message to Publisher
• Message to CMS
• (Content Mgmt. System--Host)
• Systems must be synchronized

17
A Proposed XML Schema

• lt?xml version"1.0" encoding"UTF-8" ?gt
• ltxsschema targetNamespace"http//tempuri.org/XML
  Schema.xsd" elementFormDefault"qualified"
  xmlns"http//tempuri.org/XMLSchema.xsd"
• xmlnsmstns"http//tempuri.org/
  XMLSchema.xsd" xmlnsxs"http//www.w3.org/2001/XM
  LSchema"gt
• ltxssimpleType name"calendar_unit_enum"gt
• ltxsrestriction base"xsNMTOKEN"gt
• ltxsenumeration value"day" /gt
• ltxsenumeration value"month" /gt
• ltxsenumeration value"year" /gt
• lt/xsrestrictiongt
• lt/xssimpleTypegt
• ltxselement name"notification"gt
• ltxscomplexTypegt
• ltxssequencegt
• ltxselement name"cms_host_id"
  type"xsint" minOccurs"0" default"0" /gt

18
EBSCO/THINK Proof of Concept Next Steps

• Continue to refine
• Publisher Message(s) Schema
• CMS Host Message(s) Schema
• Involve CMS Host systems in the POC (to test the
  POC more widely)
• Present findings and refined schema messages at
  the Frankfurt meeting.

19
Standards Needed?(Yes - Institutional Metadata)

• 1. Metadata definitions
• -- Under independent control (NISO)
• 2. Linking allowed Communication formats
• -- For customized data
• 3. Institutional hierarchic data maintained
• -- Intrinsic to Ringgolds success
• 4. Standards are Public and Open

20
Lack of ParticipationWhy Involve All Parties?

• Owners of data are responsible for accuracy
• -- Principle of Subsidiarity
• (lowest level of competent authority)
• -- Can be delegated to surrogates
• (i.e., Agent, ILS, Consortia but)
• Intelligent Linking Systems for data
• -- Between respective parties
• -- One-to-many Many to one

21
Pilot Expansion Focus

• Publishers ( Distributors)
• Subscription Fulfilment Software Vendors
• Hosting Platforms
• Subscription Agents
• ILS ERMS Vendors
• Libraries other institutional subscribers
• Personal subscribers
• Individual users

22
What Can You Do?

• As Information Professional
• 1. Use Identify to maintain local information
• 2. Provide feedback, do critical thinking
• 3. Possibility Gatekeeper for IP addresses
• Support NISO/input to standards
• Lobby your ILS and ERMS suppliers

23
Presentation - Recap

• Goal Improved service to end users
• Electronic content delivery Disruptive
• -- Supply chain revisions needed
• Ringgolds direct contributions
• -- Supply of Institutional identifiers
• -- JSCEIP catalyst (vendor neutral)
• More participation needed by
• -- Publisher and library software vendors

24
Questions?Contact Information

• Don.Chvatal_at_ringgold.com
• www.ringgold.com
• www.journalsupplychain.org