Can you be a pescaterian among the fort worth stockyards
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

Can you be a pescaterian among the fort worth stockyards

on

  • 188 views

Of course you can, but you don't have to eat only fish what you have to do is follow the progress of the Protocol for Exchanging Serial Content working group! PESC is a NISO Working group approved in ...

Of course you can, but you don't have to eat only fish what you have to do is follow the progress of the Protocol for Exchanging Serial Content working group! PESC is a NISO Working group approved in May, 2013, that will recommend a practice for the exchange of serial/periodical content. The nineteen member group, led by co-chairs from LC and NIH, had their first meeting in September 2013, and began by sharing packaging and submission guidelines and determining a number of subgroups to focus on various issues within the recommended practice. The PESC Working group will have been meeting for about 9 months by the time of the NASIG conference, and it will be a great opportunity to present the groups' progress to the attendees. Libraries, archives, indexing services, content aggregators, publishers, and content creators all need to exchange serial data and work with digital files of serials. These may be text based, image based, text with images, or some other combination. The file formats may be XML, EPUB, HTML, PDF, ONIX, etc. And the recipient of the files needs to be able to accommodate the various data and formats if they are to incorporate that serial content into their product or service. Having a recommended practice will improve the interactions between and among these constituents, resulting in a better end-result.
Several other NISO and ISO committees and working groups are related in some way to PESC, including ISO/IEC CD 21320-1 (Information technology Document Container File) and NISO's Supplementary Materials for Journal Articles. The session will examine the overlap, discuss the plans to ensure that the recommendations aren't contradictory, and look at the next steps as PESC works towards their 18 month goal to deliver the recommendation. Questions and comments from the audience will be encouraged.

Presenter:
Laurie Kaplan
Director of Editorial Operations, ProQuest

Statistics

Views

Total Views
188
Views on SlideShare
188
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

CC Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Can you be a pescaterian among the fort worth stockyards Presentation Transcript

  • 1. NISO – Protocol for Exchanging Serial Content (PESC) Laurie Kaplan May 2, 2014 NASIG Annual Conference Can you be a PESCaterian among the Fort Worth Stockyards
  • 2. Agenda • NISO Operating Procedures • Standard v. Recommended Practice • PESC - Background and Problem Statement • PESC Objectives and Statement of Work • Timeline • Partners and Participation • Demographics of the PESC Roster • Committee Members’ Experience • Approaches Considered • Outline of a Sample Package and Use Cases • Progress to Date and Next steps
  • 3. NISO Operating Procedures How does a new committee get started? • NISO Topic Committees identify areas of need • Interested parties can suggest a work item using the form on the NISO website • Another standards body may request that NISO adopt an existing standard as a NISO standard Suggestion Form
  • 4. NISO Operating Procedures (cont.) • Upon receipt of a proposed work item – Topic Committees prepare initial work items – Topic Committees propose the item to NISO members if • It is of sufficient value to warrant NISO’s investment • It fits within NISO’s standards program (as defined by the NISO Framework) • The standard is feasible – technically, economically, and politically • No conflicts exist with other standards in or outside NISO • A working draft can be completed within 18 months
  • 5. NISO Operating Procedures (cont.) • The proposed work item includes: – a work item title – background and problem statement (including a description of any related standards or efforts) – statement of work – potential partners and participation – a suggested timeline for development – any funding requirements
  • 6. NISO Operating Procedures (cont.) • Proposals for new work items are approved by a Topic Committee with a simple majority approval vote. • Upon Topic Committee approval, the proposal is then submitted to NISO Voting Members • Approval is by 10% of the Voting Members expressing affirmative interest • Comment periods are also included to make sure the item is unique before the creation of a working group to draft the standard or recommended practice http://www.niso.org/apps/group_public/document.php?document_id=3246&wg_abbrev=staff
  • 7. Standard v. Recommended Practice Standard • A document that provides rules or guidelines to achieve order in a given context. • Something considered by an authority or by general consent as a basis of comparison; an approved model • National standard – a standard adopted by a national standardization body and made available to the public Recommended Practice • “Best practices" or "guidelines" for methods, materials, or practices in order to give guidance to the user. • These documents usually represent a leading edge, exceptional model, or a proven industry practice. • Use of any or all elements of a Recommended Practice is discretionary; it may be used as stated or modified by the user to meet specific needs.
  • 8. PESC Background • Proposed NISO Work Item – Recommended Practice for Exchanging Serial (Periodical) Content (Short Title: Protocol for Exchanging Serial Content) • Work Item proposed by Erik Delfino and Leslie Johnston, Library of Congress, and Jeff Beck and Kimberly Tryka, NLM/NCBI/NIH • Approved by the NISO Content and Collections Management Topic Committee May 10, 2013 • Approval Ballot Period: May 12 – June 12, 2013 • First working group meeting: September 20, 2013
  • 9. PESC Background (cont.) • Serial publications represent a wide variety of content – from magazines to scholarly journals • Serial content can be text and/or image-based • Serial content can be updated daily or every few years • Many organizations work with serial content from various other organizations: – libraries, indexing services, content aggregators, archives, publishers and content creators
  • 10. Background (cont.) • Delivery methods for digital file packages can vary widely – Email with multiple attachments (.xml and .jpeg) – Zip file with many loose files, with or without a manifest or metadata – Tar file representing an entire issue with a directory structure defining relationships – EPUB file with HTML, XML and image files – Include a single article or issue, or a full journal
  • 11. Background (cont.) • Another NISO Recommended Practice – “Recommended Practice for Online Supplemental Journal Article Materials” notes: – “The recommended best practice is to use a standardized packaging format designed to support disk-based or network-based storage and transfer of digital content. The packaging is particularly important for data transfers . . .” (emphasis added)* *Section A.3.6 – Metadata and Packaging (http://www.niso.org/publications/rp/rp-15-2013)
  • 12. Problem Statement While it is agreed that there needs to be standardized packaging format for the transfer of serial content, currently there is no standardized packaging format that addresses the level of specificity and granularity needed.
  • 13. PESC Objectives • To create a recommendation for a set of guidelines – a protocol – that will define the rules to be used to create a package of serial content • Protocol would be useful for interchange of content and for automation of processes to receive and manage serial content at scale • Focus on what is being transmitted, how it is organized and what processing is required
  • 14. Statement of Work The Working Group will pursue two related activities concurrently, as decisions made and information learned in each activity will inform the other: • Determine specification – define manifest – clarify purpose of manifest – define appropriate level of exchange – prescribe type of directory structure • Examine current practice – potential to adopt an existing method rather than create one from scratch
  • 15. Timeline Plan
  • 16. Timeline Actuals Milestone Timeline Appointment of working group September 2013 Approval of charge and initial work plan October 2013 Completion of information gathering November 2013 to March 2014 Completion of initial draft of recommended practice April to May 2014 Public test and comment period June to December 2014 Responses and final recommended practice February 2015
  • 17. Partners and Participation • Libraries or other repositories with a mandate to preserve serial content • Aggregators of serial content (such as Portico or ProQuest) • Indexers of serial content • Publishers of serial content • Content conversion vendors (such Data Conversion Laboratory)
  • 18. Demographics of the PESC Roster 7 8 1 Member Type Library/Archive Publisher/Provider Other
  • 19. Demographics of the PESC Roster 7 7 2 Interest Category Supplier General Interest User
  • 20. Committee Members’ Experience • Some packaging formats used by or preferred by several of the committee members’ organizations include: – BagIt – METS – Metadata files in XML with PDFs for associated full-text files • Others indicated they take and work with any format that they receive
  • 21. BagIt • BagIt is used by several organizations in the digital library community • Wikipedia describes BagIt as follows: – BagIt is a hierarchical file packaging format designed to support disk-based storage and network transfer of arbitrary digital content. A "bag" consists of a "payload" (the arbitrary content) and "tags", which are metadata files intended to document the storage and transfer of the bag. A required tag file contains a manifest listing every file in the payload together with its corresponding checksum. Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BagIt
  • 22. BagIt (cont.) • BagIt works well for digital content normally kept as a collection of files (+) • It is also well-suited to the export, for archival purposes, of content normally kept in database structures that are unsupported by the recipient (+) • BagIt focuses on the higher-level package (-) • BagIt does not include requirements for the description and organization of the content (-) – Therefore the metadata needs for exchanging serial content are not met – Descriptive and structural content would have to be added to relate content as the serial evolves
  • 23. XLink • The committee reviewed a possible XLink solution • Concerns were the XML requirement, complexity of the concept, low adoption in the community • XML Linking Language, or XLink, is an XML markup language and W3C specification that provides methods for creating internal and external links within XML documents, and associating metadata with those links. Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xlink
  • 24. Approaches Considered • Defining typical system activities related to transferring serial content: – Discover information (description & identification) – Deliver content and information – Rights management (including component parts) – Content management • Considered the package in terms of layers – Who sent it, what is included, how does it relate
  • 25. Approaches Considered (cont.) • Areas to which standards can be applied: – Manifest for the package • Key item • List contents of package for validation • Be content-agnostic • But still point the content to the next process – Schema/tag set for the item metadata – Schema/tag set for the article – Schema/tag set for inclusion of rights information
  • 26. Outline of a sample package • Package Name – Publisher or Title – Volume or Volume Range – Issue or Issue Range – Package Type (.ext) • Manifest Head – Package name – Distributor – Copyright Holder – Recipient – Full Title Name – Publisher or title abbrev. – Count of package contents • Manifest Contents – File Inventory – Directory Inventory – File Sizes • File & Directory Naming – Unique, permanent article id – Content type (article, fig, etc) – Sequence (if applicable) – File type or directory (ext.) • Metadata – Genre – Collection/Series – Volume – Issue – Add/Change/Delete – Assembly Instructions – Permissions
  • 27. Various Use Cases Purpose Sender Receiver Newly released journal content Publisher Library/Customer Issue’s worth of content (metadata & PDF) Publisher Archive/Library/Customer Archiving journal content Publisher/Host Archive Single article to an archive Publisher Archive “Publish ahead of print” to host PrePress Vendor Online host (Vendor) Full issue to host PrePress Vendor Online host (Vendor) Full issue to indexer PrePress Vendor Indexer (Vendor) Indexing metadata to bibliographic db Publisher/Host Bibliographic db (Vendor) A year of metadata for a journal Publisher Library/customer Indexing full text and metadata in search eng. Publisher/Host Search Engine (Vendor) Journal issues to online bookstores Publisher Online bookstore (Vendor) Transfer journal content (1 publisher to 2d) Publisher X Publisher Y
  • 28. Progress to Date Define focus of the committee Investigate existing package options Break into committees for in depth analysis
  • 29. Next Steps • Group recently split into two different paths: – Conformance – levels of packages and definition of minimum compliance – Use cases – further define the groups and interactions • Will meet separately for about 6 weeks and then review progress as a whole • Create a draft recommendation • Ultimate goal for those using the recommended packaging is to reduce processing costs and speed processing without manual intervention
  • 30. Contact Information • NISO – PESC: http://www.niso.org/workrooms/pesc/ • Laurie Kaplan – Director of Editorial Operations, ProQuest – laurie.kaplan@proquest.com Thank you!