RCF on Authenticity and Version Control

1
RCF on Authenticity and Version Control

• Cliff Morgan
• NISO/ALPSP WG on JAVs

2
Background

• Sally Morris paper April 2005
• So many versions now available
• How do you know which version?
• May differ in minor or major respects
• She identified 13 possible versions
• Proposed work to identify versions
• Recommend nomenclature and metadata
• Settled on NISO/ALPSP WG launched
• September 2005

3
WGs

• Two groups Technical and Review
• TWG draw up use cases
• Determine common stages
• Recommend terms and definitions
• RWG review
• TWG respond etc.

4
FYI only - TWG

• Andrew Wray, IoPP
• Bernie Rous, ACM and CrossRef
• Bev Acreman, TF Informa
• Catherine Jones, CCLRC
• Claire Bird, OUP
• Evan Owens, Portico
• John Ober, CDL
• Peter McCracken, Serials Solutions
• Scott Plutchak, UAB

5
FYI only - RWG

• Anthony Watkinson, Consultant
• Barbara Meredith, AAP
• Bruce Rosenblum, Inera
• Candy Zemon, Polaris Library Systems
• David Goodman, LIU
• Emily Dill, Indiana U
• Erik Oltmans, KB
• Fred Friend, JISC (Rachel Bruce as alternate)
• Gavin Swanson, CUP
• Heather Reid, CCC
• Helen Atkins, HighWire

6

• Jan Peterson, Infotrieve
• Janet Halsall, CABI
• Lindi Belfield, Elsevier ScienceDirect
• Nathan Robertson, U Maryland
• Norma Paskin, IDF
• Peter Suber, Earlham College
• Rebecca Simon, U Cal Press
• Richard Fidczuk, SAGE
• Sally Morris, ALPSP,
• Sarah Rosenblum, LSE Library
• Ted Koppel, Ex Libris
• Toby Green, OECD

7
The recommended vocabulary

• Authors Original
• Accepted Manuscript
• Proof
• Version of Record
• Updated Version of Record

8
Some points

• Focus is on journal articles
• Phylum rather than species
• (minimalists vs structuralists
• lumpers vs splitters)
• Value-added state changes
• From origination to publication and
• updates, via formal public acts by
• a recognized party
• Concentrate on whats important
• from the users point of view

9

• Some versions iterative some fixed
• Some terms have synonyms (ish)
• Didnt come up with a whole set of
• neologisms, so some loading
• Hopefully fairly intuitive
• May need to use Corrected VoR
• and Enhanced VoR instead of
• Updated VoR

10

• Did not get bogged down in format
• versioning at our hierarchical level,
• these would be sub-types
• No problem with copies of same
• version no implication that only sits
• in one location our focus is on progressive
• stages
• Metadata may indicate which party is
• making version statement

11
What to do next

• Respond formally to RWG comments
• Get the terms out there
• Move on to metadata
• Dont get distracted by compliance
• issues
• Scope creep? If it works for other docs,
• so be it if it doesnt, so be that too

12
Other projects

• RIVER (Repositories Identification
• of VERsions) scoping project for JISC
• VERSIONS (Versions of Eprints a
• user Requirements Study and
• Investigation Of the Need for Standards)
• LSE Library and Nereus Consortium
• Focus on economics
• Runs to end Jan 2007

13

• CrossRef IR Committee
• Standard wording to identify version
• Glossary of all possible terms

14
Conclusion

• Everybody agrees that it would be
• good if there were standard terms
• The problem is agreeing what those
• terms should be

15
For more info

• Go to NISO website
• http//www.niso.org/committees/
• Journal_versioning/JournalVer_comm.html