This document discusses approaches to including serials in institutional digital repositories using examples from Stanford University's digital repository. It finds that currently serials are handled inconsistently, with individual issues given separate records without links to catalog records. This leads to a confusing user experience where digital holdings are hard to identify. The document proposes a future model with a descriptive parent record linking to individual issue records and summary holdings statements. Key open questions remain around metadata workflows and integrating serial records between the repository and catalog.

1. Do Serials have a Place in
the Institutional Digital
Repository?
Kay Teel
Metadata Librarian for Serials and Arts Resources
Stanford University Libraries
NASIG 2016

2. “Do serials have a place in the
institutional digital repository?”
Short answer: YES!*
*But how do we get them there? And what do we do with them
once they’re there?

3. Institutional Repositories
• Commonly held content:
• Book chapters
• Books
• Conference articles
• Courseware/syllabi
• Data sets
• Journal articles
• Presentations (e.g., PowerPoint slides)
• Technical reports, working papers
• Theses and dissertations
Source: Burns, C., Lana, A., & Budd, J.M. (2013). Institutional Repositories: Exploration of Costs and Value. D-Lib Magazine, 19(1/2).
doi:10.1045/january2013-burns
Commonly held content
can usually be treated
monographically

4. One approach: Each serial issue is a separate file in the IR

5. Another approach: Serial is a collection and individual issues
are files within the collection.

6. E-journal publishing platform as part of an IR

7. Shared repository with digital holdings from different sources

8. Stanford Digital Repository (SDR)
• In production since 2005
• Currently holds about 1 million digital objects
• Stanford-produced content: student theses, faculty
research, staff publications, etc.
• Content from other sources: archival collections, archived
media, government documents
• Managed by the libraries’ Digital Library Systems and
Services division (DLSS)

9. Stanford Digital Repository (SDR)
technical info
• SDR uses Hydra, composed of open source technologies
including:
• Fedora - repository for managing digital objects
• Solr - indexing and searching repository contents
• Blacklight - builds on the Solr index to provide faceted
searching, browsing, and tailored views of objects
• Blacklight is also used for SearchWorks, the libraries’
online catalog
• Moab - developed by Stanford for versioning digital objects

10. • All digital objects in SDR have a PURL page
• PURL page metadata is in MODS (XML), the lingua
franca of SDR
• The MODS metadata vary from skimpy (title,
author, purl) to robust
• The MODS records are released into SearchWorks
(the online catalog) when an SDR digital collection
is made available
• When there is a MARC record in SearchWorks for
the same digital object, the MODS metadata can be
refreshed from the MARC metadata

12. Serials in the SDR
• No consistent approach (yet!) for deposit and metadata
• Most serial digital objects not tied to their MARC record
counterparts
• Despite these drawbacks, there is strong interest from
depositors in depositing serials
• Deposit into SDR = a way to digitize print holdings
for online delivery
• Deposit into SDR = a way to archive/preserve a
serial already available online

13. Case study 1:
“Stanford scientific
review”
• Student-led science magazine
• Published 2003-2009 in print and
online
• Stanford holdings scattered among
various branches, including the
University Archives
• The science branches digitized a
complete run for the SDR

14. Online catalog
search results:
• 18 results include individual MODS
records for each digitized issue
• The digitized issues are also
available from the MARC record for
the serial
• Not obvious to the user which issues
are available digitally
• The digital issues only have caption
data in the individual MODS records

15. Digitized issues are available from the MARC record,
but …
Which issue is which?
What are the digital holdings?

16. Case study 2: “People’s Computer
Company”
• Newsletter of a computer interest group
based in the San Francisco Bay Area
• Published bimonthly 1972-1981 (with
title changes)
• Stanford Libraries has an incomplete
print run in special collections and a few
volumes in microfilm
• Digitized 39 issues received as part of
an archive
• Digital holdings include issues missing
from our print run & microfilm holdings

17. • No links to digital
holdings from the
MARC records
• Each digitized issue has
its own MODS record
• Search results are
randomly arranged
• MODS records don’t
show the title changes
Online catalog
search results:

18. Case study 3: AMICA bulletins
• Published 1964 to current day
• Several title changes (6 MARC records)
• Stanford Libraries’ print holdings extensive but not complete
• Digitized 385 issues received as part of an archive
• Digital holdings include volumes missing from our print holdings

19. • No links to digital holdings from the MARC records
• Each digitized issue has its own MODS record
• Search results are randomly arranged
• MODS records don’t show the title changes

20. • Inconsistent user experience in the online catalog
• No one-stop-shopping for print + digitized issues in SDR
(contrast with print + commercially available online serials using
single-record approach)
• SDR serials aren’t highlighted
• SDR serials appear more confusing to access
• Hard to figure out what the digital holdings are
• Variety of digital accessioning practices leads to different MODS
metadata
• Different MODS metadata leads to even more confusion
What do we have now?
A mess!

21. Descriptive metadata model

22. Aspirations for the future
• Exclude MODS records for the
individual digital issues from
search results
• Add summary holdings
statement for digitized issues in
SDR
• List individual issues by caption
in a logical order (most recent
first, the same as print holdings
are arranged)

23. Future record view choice 1: text list of digitized issues

24. Future record view choice 2: list with cover thumbnails

25. What’s to be worked out
• SDR is currently set up to support MODS dependent objects with MODS
parent objects (collections)
• Works well for archival collections; everything else looks odd (made-up
collections)
• Support for MODS dependent objects with MARC parent objects is in its
early stages and doesn’t (yet) support a serial model
• Metadata workflow questions:
• How to get the caption/designation data into the dependent objects’
descriptions
• Standardize caption/designation format (may use ISO 8601 or EDTF
instead of transcription)
• How to get the summary statement of SDR’s digital holdings

26. Thank you!
Questions? Lessons learned the hard way? Success stories?
kteel@stanford.edu