Electronic Resource Management

1
Electronic Resource Management

• An Overview of Standards

2
Presenters

• Mary Bailey, Serials Electronic Resource
  Librarian, Kansas State University
• Dalene Hawthorne, Head of Systems Technical
  Services, ESU
• Anne Liebst, Assistant Director for Technical
  Services, Washburn University

3
Agenda

• Why are standards important?
• Brief history of electronic resources
• Electronic Resources Management Initiative
• Managing License Information
• Managing journal article versions
• Open URL
• COUNTER
• SUSHI

4
Electronic Resource Management An Overview of
Standards

• Anne Liebst, Washburn University
• Tri-Conference 2007
• April 10, 2007

5
Standards?

• Well, its a lot like
• click here

6
What I really mean is

• standards are all over the place
• MARC
• Metadata XML
• Z39.50
• RFID
• AACR2
• OpenAccess
• (Just to name a few!)

7
And now we are being told to throw out the
standards!

• Roy Tennant MARC must die Library Journal
  10/15/2002, Vol. 127 Issue 17, p26
• Roy Tennant Will RDA be DOA? Library Journal
  03/15/2007, Vol. 132 Issue 4, p

8
But wait!

• Wiley just bought Blackwells
• CSA just bought ProQuest
• Springer is about to buy Taylor Francis
• and the list goes on and on

9
So standards become important for electronic
materials

• To standardize terminology and definitions,
  methods of data collection and methods of
  analyzing the data with the aim of comparing
  results and of aggregating results on a regional,
  national, or even international level.

10
So standards become important for electronic
materials

• For the electronic collection the online
  catalog the librarys web site electronic
  document delivery online reference services
  user training on electronic services and
  internet access.
• The main problem is how to count usage. And who
  sets the standards?

11
National Information Standards Organization (NISO)

• Non-profit association accredited by the American
  National Standards Institute (ANSI).
• Identifies, develops, maintains, and publishes
  technical standards to manage information in our
  changing and ever-more digital environment. NISO
  standards apply both traditional and new
  technologies to the full range of
  information-related needs, including retrieval,
  re-purposing, storage, metadata, and
  preservation.
• Founded in 1939, incorporated in 1989.
• Represents U.S. in the International
  Standardization Organization (ISO).

12
(No Transcript)
13
Pre-Standards Research

• Helps NISO map the business and technology
  landscape where its standards must operate.
• A pre-standards workshop focused on Digital
  Rights Expression.
• An exploratory workgroup on RFID examined the
  need for standards to support use in the
  library and book industries.

14
Active Standards Development

• NISO charters groups to create standards and best
  practices.
• The Metasearch Initiative produced a guideline,
  two draft standards and a best practices
  document.
• The Standardized Usage Statistics Harvesting
  Initiative (SUSHI) will help librarians track
  usage of online content.
• A License Expression Working Group will develop a
  single standard for the exchange of license
  information between publishers and libraries.
• The Web Services and Practices Working Group will
  produce best practices and interoperability
  mechanisms documents.

15
Draft Standards in Trial Use

• Enable implementers to test the product.
• Collection Description Specification and the
  Information Retrieval Service Description
  Specification work together to make it easier to
  find and use resources from the hidden Web.

16
Standards

• Several Z39 Standards went to ballot others
  earned approval from ANSI.
• Data DictionaryTechnical Metadata for Digital
  Still Images
• The OpenURL Framework for Context-Sensitive
  Services
• Bibliographic References
• Scientific and Technical ReportsPreparation,
  Presentation and Preservation
• Guidelines for the Construction, Format, and
  Management of Monolingual Controlled Vocabularies
• Information Services and Use Metrics and
  Standards for Libraries and Information

17
Implementation

• Maintenance Agencies, like ALA, assist in the
  dissemination of standards and provide
  information on changes.
• All standards are reviewed on a regular basis at
  least five years after approval and revised as
  the information environment changes.

18
(No Transcript)
19
Example

• ANSI/NISO Z39.50 2003
• Information Retrieval Application Service
  Definition Protocol Specification
• Abstract This standard defines a client/server
  based service and protocol for Information
  Retrieval. It specifies procedures and formats
  for a client to search a database provided by a
  server, retrieve database records, and perform
  related information retrieval functions. The
  protocol addresses communication between
  information retrieval applications at the the
  client and server it does not address
  interaction between the client and the end-user.
• Maintenance Agency Library of Congress

20
In Development

• NISO Standardized Usage Statistics Harvesting
  Initiative (SUSHI)
• United Kingdoms Counting Online Usage of
  Electronic Resources (COUNTER)

21
Brief History of E-Resources

• Dalene Hawthorne
• Head of Systems and Technical Services
• Emporia State University
• KLA Tri-Conference - April 10, 2007
• Topeka, Kansas

22
Brief History Lesson

• It all started with MARC in the mid-1960s
• Led by the Library of Congress
• Pilot project ended in 1967
• General distribution began in 1969
• Laid the foundation for resource sharing

23
Databases in the 1960s

• First bibliographic databases were created at
  about the same time
• Scientific and government information
• Driven by concerns about scholarly communication
• National Science Foundations Office of Science
  Information Service legally charged facilitating
  access
• First Dialog database created in 1966

24
The 70s and 80s

• WorldCat was introduced in 1971 by OCLC
• First online catalogs were made available by the
  mid 1970s, but many libraries brought theirs up
  in the 1980s
• CD-ROM technology changed databases in the mid
  1980s
• User friendly interfaces
• Juke boxes and networks
• Full-text
• No per-search charges
• License agreements
• Online databases were still heavily in use, but
  searches were usually mediated by a librarian

25
The Web

• The Web changed everything
• User-friendly interfaces
• Hypertext linking
• Easily accessible from outside the library
• Different types of resources
• More full text
• Search engines
• Link resolvers
• Statistics
• Need for new standards

26
Electronic Resource Management Systems

• Many electronic resources to manage
• Until recently, there werent tools available
• Libraries used home-grown databases,
  spreadsheets, file folders, e-mail file folders

27
MIT Libraries

• Developed VERA in FileMaker Pro
• Manages acquisitions metadata
• Provides access to e-resources through
  system-generated lists and searching capabilities
• Use SFX as their link resolver

28
(No Transcript)
29
(No Transcript)
30
Emporia State University

• Serials Solutions A-Z List MARC records
• EBSCOHost EJS Registration Tracker
• Databases stored in content management system
  developed by the university webmaster
• License Review
• Creating bibliographic records
• Scanning licenses into Millennium Media and
  linking to bib records
• Limiting access by creating a passworded
  electronic reserve course
• Planning for an ERM system
• Implementing Innovatives WebBridge OpenURL link
  resolver

31
(No Transcript)
32
(No Transcript)
33
(No Transcript)
34
(No Transcript)
35
(No Transcript)
36
(No Transcript)
37
(No Transcript)
38
(No Transcript)
39
(No Transcript)
40
(No Transcript)
41
(No Transcript)
42
Kansas State University

• K-State currently uses a homegrown databases
• Purchased Verde and plan to implement

43
(No Transcript)
44
(No Transcript)
45
(No Transcript)
46
(No Transcript)
47
Electronic Resource Management Initiative Phase
I

• Digital Library Federation (DLF) Electronic
  Resource Management Initiative began fall 2002
  and produced
• Functional Requirements
• Workflow Diagrams
• Data Dictionary
• Entity Relationship Diagram
• Data Structure
• Final Report June 2005

48
Electronic Resource Management Initiative Phase
II

• Data Standards
• License Expression
• Usage Data
• Training in License Term Mapping

49
Managing Licensing Information

• Mary Bailey
• Serials Electronic Resource Librarian
• Kansas State University Libraries
• KLA Tri-Conference - April 10, 2007
• Topeka, Kansas

50
DLF ERM Initiative Report

• August 2004
• Project to develop common specifications and
  tools for management of license agreements
• http//www.diglib.org/pubs/dlf102/

51
(No Transcript)
52
ERMI License Terms

• Citation requirement details
• Display
• Digital copy
• Print copy
• Scholarly sharing
• Distance education
• ILL print or fax
• Ill
• Electronic Fair use clause indicator

• Course Reserve print
• Course Reserve electronic/ Cached copy
• Electronic link permission
• Course Pack print
• Course Pack electronic
• Remote access
• Walk-in users
• Authorized user groups
• Authorized locations

53
License Expression Working Group

• NISO, DLF, EDItEUR and PLS were charged to
  develop a single standard for the exchange of
  license information between publishers and
  libraries
• Monitor and make recommendations regarding the
  further development of standards relating to
  electronic resources and license expression
• Actively engage in the development of the ONIX
  license messaging specification
• http//www.niso.org/committees/License_expression/
  LicenseEx_comm.html

54
ONIX for Licensing Terms

• Electronic communication of usage terms between
  publishers and libraries
• ONIX Publisher License format (ONIX-PL)
• Most recent draft March 2, 2007
• Goal of first stable version by June 2007

55
Interoperability between Acquisitions Modules
ERMs

• White paper January 17, 2007
• Prepared by subcommittee of DLF ERM initiative
• Investigation to determine the feasibility of
  propagating financial data across platforms with
  same or different ERMs and ILS
• http//www.haverford.edu/library/DLF_ERMS_white_pa
  per.pdf

56
Shared E-Resource Understanding (SERU)

• Working group
• Charge develop recommended practices to sell
  e-resources without licenses if they feel their
  perception of risk has been adequately addressed
  by current law and developing norms of behavior
• http//www.niso.org/committees/SERU

57
SERU How will it work

• Forego license rely on shared understanding
• Orders placed through vendors such as serial
  agents or consortia
• SERU will be posted on NISO website
• NISO registry for publishers and libraries
• FAQ on the NISO SERU website

58
Managing Journal Article Versions

• Mary Bailey
• Serials Electronic Resource Librarian
• Kansas State University Libraries
• KLA Tri-Conference - April 10, 2007
• Topeka, Kansas

59
Print Journal

• Easy to know what you had
• Dated, volume and issue numbers
• Specific journal tangible- physical piece
• Didnt change

60
Online Journal

• Published version
• Enhanced version
• Corrected version
• Self Archived
• Draft, pre-print, post-print
• Different versions submitted to multiple journals
• What is the definitive version?

61
Publishers discussion

• 2000 article in Learned Publishing, Defining and
  Certifying Electronic Publication in Science -
  Proposed that the only meaningful version was the
  Definitive version
• 2005 Sally Morris CEO of ALPSP proposed a working
  group of NISO/ALPSP members to explore issues
  about version and standard terminology

62
Working Groups goals

• Determine a set of use cases to work from
• Define a set of terms that all can use

63
WG Recommendations (12/16/06)

• Terms and definitions for journal article
  versions
• Explanation of project background
• Set of use cases
• Comments received
• Propose that terms be disseminated by NISO/ASPSP
• http//www.niso.org/committees/Journal_versioning/
  Journal_Ver_comm.html

64
Proposed Terms and Definitions

• Authors original
• Accepted manuscript
• Proof
• Version of record
• Corrected version of record
• Enhanced version of record

65
Authors original

• Version considered by author to be of sufficient
  quality to be submitted for review by a second
  party.
• Can be prior to formal review for publication.
• Author accepts full responsibility for article.
• Content and layout set by author

66
Accepted Manuscript

• Version has been accepted for publication in a
  journal
• Publisher takes responsibility for article
• Content and layout as submitted by author

67
Proof

• Version created as part of the publication
  process
• Includes copy-edited manuscript, galley proofs,
  page proof and revised proofs.
• Content has been changed, layout is now publishers

68
Version of record

• Version made available by any organization acting
  as publisher
• Includes early release articles

69
Corrected version of record

• Version of record in which errors in the version
  of record have been corrected.
• Can be publishers, authors, or processing errors

70
Enhanced version of record

• Version of record that has been updated or
  enhanced by the provision of supplementary
  material

71
Last points

• Date stamps, version numbers and metadata records
  could be used to differentiate versions that may
  have several iterations.
• Relationships need to be codified though the
  retrospective act of including an unambiguous
  reference or link within the metadata of a
  previous version to the version of record.

72

• Value-adding process relationships
• (dissemination/publishing family)
• Authors Original
• 2. Accepted Manuscript
• 3. Proof
• 4. Version of Record
• 5. Corrected or Enhanced Version of Record

Conceptual provenance relationships (citation
family) Working papers
Blog entry Tech. Report Presentation
73
Assumptions In todays world

• Any of the content objects (versions) in the
  previous graphic can be public
• Any of the versions can reside in identical form
  in multiple places
• All of these versions should have metadata that
  links it to the related objects
• Contents objects in the conceptual family can
  become (move to) dissemination publishing objects

74
NISO/ALPSP Working Group

• The Working Groups goal is to have a final draft
  available for public review in early 2007.

75
Sources

• NISO/SLPSP Working Group on Versions of Journal
  Articles http//www.niso.org/committees/Journal_ve
  rsion/JournalVer_comm.html
• Peter McCracken. Managing Journal Article
  Versions Across the Lifecycle. Presented at the
  NISO Managing Electronic Collections Solutions
  Forum. Retrieved October 27, 2006 from
  http//www.niso.org/news/events_workshops/Collecti
  ons-06-Agenda.html
• Todd Carpenter. Standards Column Toward a
  Terminology of Journal Article Versions. Against
  the Grain 18, no. 6 79-80

76
OpenURL

• Mary Bailey
• Serials Electronic Resource Librarian
• Kansas State University Libraries
• KLA Tri-Conference - April 10, 2007
• Topeka, Kansas

77
What is OpenURL?

• Type of URL containing resource metadata
  primarily used by libraries
• Implemented by information providers by
  dynamically inserting an appropriate base URL
  into web pages sent to an authenticated user

78
Base URL in Version 0.1

• Consists of institutional link servers address
  and a query string
• http//pulsar.lib.ksu.edu/cgi?
• Genrebookisbn0836218310 titleTheFarSideGal
  lery3

79
OpenURL Version 1.0

• http//pulsar.lib.ksu.edu/cgi?url_verZ39.88-2004
  rft_val_fmtinfoofi/fmtkevbookrft.isbn0836218
  310rft.btitleTheFarSideGallery3
• Most database vendors use one of these or a
  hybrid of the two, but you can expect to see the
  older version disappear

80
OpenURL Standards

• Allows the user to access the appropriate copy
  with fewer clicks by
• Packaging metadata and identifiers describing the
  information object and
• Sending this package to a link-resolution server
  or resolver

81
Link Resolver Knowledge Base

• Is the brain
• Database of all the holdings in a collection
• Contains journal coverage
• Embargos
• Tracks movement of titles between publishers

82
Knowledge Base Extended Services

• Check local holdings for other formats (print,
  microform, etc.)
• Link to and populate ILL form on the OPAC
• Link to book reviews or articles that cite the
  current resource

83
Branding

• Link resolvers allow a library to create branding
• On your own library pages
• Match on Publishers databases

84
(No Transcript)
85
(No Transcript)
86
OpenURL standards 1.0

• What our users expect
• Not quite one click, but certainly closer
• Eliminates frustration of non-authorization
• Link resolvers provide the added value of
  extended services

87
Sources

• Ann Apps and Ross MacIntyre. Why OpenURL? D-Lib
  Magazine 12, no. 5. Retrieved Mar. 26, 2007 from
  http//www.dlib.org/dlib/may06/apps/05apps.html
• Open URL Framework for Context Sensitive
  Services http//www.niso.org/committees/committee_
  ax.htm
• Ross Singer. Helping You Buy Link Resolver
  Tools. Computers in Libraries 26, no. 215-23
• Wikipedia, OpenURL http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Op
  enURL

88
Electronic Resource Management COUNTER and SUSHI

• Anne Liebst, Washburn University
• Tri-Conference 2007
• April 10, 2007

89
Librarians need meaningful statistics from
electronic databases/journals

• Assess the value of different online
  products/services
• Make better-informed purchasing decisions
• Plan infrastructure and allocation of resources
• Support internal marketing and promotion of
  library services.

90
Vendors require online usage statistics

• Experiment with new pricing models
• New product development
• Plan infrastructure, improve website design and
  navigation
• Obtain improved market analysis and demographics.

91
New ways to answer classic questions

• Which titles should be in our collections?
• Which titles should we cancel?
• Which titles should we add?
• Is this collection a good value?

92
What is COUNTER?

• Counting Online Usage of Networked Electronic
  Resources
• Located in the United Kingdom
• Formally launched in March 2002
• Leading initiative in the field
• Objective is to develop an agreed upon
  international Codes of Practice governing the
  recording and exchange of online usage data
• http//www.projectcounter.org

93
Usage reports

• Because usage records are generated from one
  platform to another
• COUNTER compliance will be a guiding principle
  for usage that should be reported
• Encourages the use of standards for data
  collection by ERM systems.

94
Usage Reports

• Full-text article requests by month and journal
  title
• Turnaways by month and journal title
• Number of item requests by month, journal title
  and page type
• Total searches and sessions by month and
  database
• Total searches, sessions and full-text requests
  by month and database
• Turnaways by month and database
• Searches and sessions by month and service.

95
(No Transcript)
96
What is SUSHI?

• Standardized Usage Statistics Harvesting
  Initiative
• Protocol and proposed standard that can be used
  by ERM and other systems to automate the
  transport of COUNTER formatted usage statistics
• Standard client/server web services SOAP (Simple
  Object Access Protocol) request/response for the
  XML version of the COUNTER report.

97
Simply put

• It is the Z39.93 protocol that defines an
  automated request and response model for the
  harvesting of electronic resource usage data
  utilizing a web services framework that can
  replace the user-mediated collection of usage
  data reports
• Designed to work with Project COUNTER reports,
  the protocol is also extensible to other types of
  usage reports.

98
What are the benefits?

• It automates a tedious and repetitive process
  current practice calls for library staff to go to
  each individual publishers website and retrieve
  statistical data
• In some cases it is COUNTER compliant and in
  other cases it is not
• SUSHI automates the process and, by default,
  causes the publisher to put usage data into a
  standard format.

99
What are the benefits?

• The protocol is designed to be one report at a
  time, so requesting libraries simply make a
  separate request for each report needed
• Results can be aggregated by the requesting
  library using their ERM system
• Set a time and a day and your reports are
  automated
• You do not need an ERM system to use SUSHI, any
  software that can initiate a web service that can
  use the SUSHI WSDL and Schema will work.

100
Test it out at

• http//www.niso.org/committees/SUSHI/SUSHI_comm.ht
  ml

101

• Thank you!
• Mary Bailey, Kansas State University
• Dalene Hawthorne, Emporia State University
• Anne Liebst, Washburn University