PECAN Phase 2: Pilot for Ensuring Continuity of Access via Nesli2
PECAN Phase 2Pilot for Ensuring Continuity of Access via Nesli2 Adam Rusbridge EDINA, University of Edinburgh Workshops with Libraries 12th March 2012 :: JISC Collections, London 19th March 2012 :: EDINA, Edinburgh
EDINA Proposal• Develop a prototype entitlement registry • Match up title information with institutional subscriptions and post-cancellation entitlement• Key components were to: • Design and implement a demonstrator Entitlement Registry • Supporting initial ingest and display of data • Assess methods to automate data ingest • Assess methods to maintain accuracy of records over time • Understand information requirements • For recording, maintaining, providing access • UK HE community • NESLi2 publishers
Initial Data Model • Package (collection) as central component • Flexible institutional identifiers • Record institutional relationships (record license transfer info) • Capture ‘verification statement’ • Capture publisher transfers over time
Data Sources: Handling dynamic information • Two related content requirements • 1. Record of Entitlement • Messy as an institution can change titles part-way through a deal (keeping the same cost value) • Messy as publishers transfer titles, and entitlements, to other publishers • 2. Current information about a deal • Messy as titles move in and out of a deal • How do we capture this dynamic information?
Data Sources: Handling dynamic information 3. Duplicate coverage: is it useful to identify reasons for this? • Different subscriptions, purchasing departments • How do we usefully distinguish purchases and purchasing authorities 5. How important is the ‘package’? • Neither publisher provided us with this, although we did request it • How to define and maintain information on package/collection? • Journal A-Z lists are a good source of information • But don’t seem to be updated regularly? • Recording publisher transfers • Source information through the TRANSFER initiative 9. Purchasing authority: understanding account numbers
Data Formats • Spreadsheets are satisfactory for development purposes, but do not scale • A-Z title lists are a suitable source for title information • Effort to ingest every time: standard formats or a central source like the ISSN Register would assist • Service- level needs a standard format • ONIX for Serials: SOH (Serials Online Holdings) • ONIX for Serials: SPS (Serials Products and Subscriptions) • KBART..? • However, need better publisher support before expecting them to undertake developments.
Demo • http://pecandev.edina.ac.uk:8080 • Jane Librarian / passw0rd • Bill Books / passw0rd
Conclusions so far… • Publishers manually intervened to generate information • We need to specify and agree data field & formats • Negotiate supply of this, with sensible timings • Standards will be useful • ONIX family show promise • Longer-term prospect: negotiation needed for publisher support • To get publisher buy-in, we need new workflows around supply of information • As part of contract, publisher delivers record of entitlement to registry • Make this a requirement of future NESLi2 license…? • Need service level registry first • Goal is to minimise need for manual intervention
How can the prototype be extended? • Prototype has limited functionality • Use entitlement registry to assist with the verification process • Draw in data from other services, e.g. Keepers Registry • Following slides contain a selection of wire-framed ideas to highlight possibilities.