• Save

Loading…

Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.

Like this presentation? Why not share!

OpenURL Resolver Implementation: Trialing, Tuning, Training (SLA 2006)

on

  • 785 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
785
Views on SlideShare
785
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

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

OpenURL Resolver Implementation: Trialing, Tuning, Training (SLA 2006) OpenURL Resolver Implementation: Trialing, Tuning, Training (SLA 2006) Presentation Transcript

  • OpenURL Resolver Implementation: Trialing, Tuning, Training Rafal Kasprowski 2006 SLA Conference Baltimore, MD June 12, 2006
  • Major Implementation Stages
    • Trialing : evaluation of OpenURL resolvers, resulting in selection
    • Tuning : OpenURL resolver implementation and troubleshooting
    • Training : training of reference and instruction staff for the benefit of patrons
  • Advantages of Link Resolver System
    • Allows users to find all available instances of a full text (e.g. article) in fewer searches;
    • Provides users with other related links specified by customer: catalog, ILL, etc.
    • Displays all results in a single uniform interface;
    • All data is stored in one knowledge base and needs to be updated only in a single location.
  • OpenURL Resolver Components
    • Underlying knowledge base
        • Database containing library’s subscriptions incl. holdings (e.g. electronic journal manager, EJM)
        • Tells the link resolver what full texts are available from publishers the library is subscribed to
    • Linking technology
        • Link resolver checks library’s holdings in EJM for the selected citation and displays relevant providers on a menu page
  • Interaction with Link Resolver System
    • User searches in a resource (source) in which the resolver system has been set up;
    • A link or icon to the resolver is displayed next to each citation result;
    • If the full text for a citation is not available in resource, user clicks on the resolver link to search for full text;
    • Resolver checks the EJM for relevant holdings;
    • Resolver presents full-text results as hyperlinks in a separate menu (targets); other links are also provided: catalog, ILL form, related links
  • Link Resolver Services
    • Some link resolver packages on the market:
    • Institution may choose EJM and resolver from the same or different vendors
    SFX SFX Ex Libris TOUR Journal Manager TDNet ArticleLinker Access & Management Suite SerialsSolutions LinkSource A-to-Z EBSCO Resolver EJM Vendor
  • Implementation at Univ. Houston
    • Univ. Houston, phase 1:
        • Provide patrons with easier access to full-text resources subscribed by library
        • Result: Addition of TDNet OpenURL Resolver (TOUR) to EJM at no cost
    • Univ. Houston, phase 2:
        • Replace underlying EJM because of data integrity problems: unacceptable content update delays
        • Result: Switch to EBSCO’s EJM–link resolver package; both EJM and resolver were changed
  • Link Resolver Selection Process
    • Determine budget for the service - select vendors and package that fit budget best;
    • Create implementation task force as liaison between library administration and library community;
    • Establish link resolver (and if necessary EJM) selection criteria from literature on the topic;
    • Test products against criteria grid;
    • Ensure transparency: document process and make deliverables available to library community via intranet;
  • Link Resolver Selection Process (cont’d)
    • Librarian instruction: Explain EJM–link resolver system and produce background documents;
    • Get library community involved in testing: make their vote count in terms of product’s user-friendliness;
    • After product is selected, provide additional training to library community on specific product selected;
    • Announce service changes to patrons on library Web site;
    • After implementation, make resolver menu part of database training for patrons.
  • Examples of Selection Criteria
    • Cost;
    • Vendor history and stability;
    • Known customer service;
    • Linking response time (server problems);
    • Display of coverage information (holdings range, embargo);
    • Customization options (branding, link layout, third-party links, public links);
    • Control over admin functions (link order, link display criteria);
    • Number of source and target providers covered;
    • Full-text linking success rate.
  • Problems at Trialing Stage
    • Not all product features available at trial phase for testing
        • Not all holdings data migrated to new EJM
        • Not all sources and targets turned on for link resolver testing
    • Product evolves during trial phase
        • Platform change, e.g. LinkSource: EBSCOhost  A-to-Z
        • Data migration and bug fixes cause implementation delay
    • Level of real customer support
        • EJM data update delays compromise linking effectiveness
  • Problems after Implementation
    • Indexing problems affecting linking
        • Source-to-target mismatches: ISSN, journal title, page format
        • Indexing gaps: no ISSN, ISBN, journal title, starting page
    • New or existing journals/collections not in EJM
        • Linking impossible – profiles must be added by provider
    • Resolver menu links may need to be modified
        • OpenURL links for certain providers
        • Non-OpenURL catalog link should work for ISSN, ISBN, Title searches
    • ILL link should handle all content types (journals, books, book chapters, proceedings, etc.)
        • for a single database: PsycInfo in EBSCOhost, Compendex in EV2
        • across a database platform, e.g. EV2 (Compendex, Inspec, NTIS)
        • across platforms, e.g. accession number is AN (EBSCO) and ABBR (EV2)
  • Lessons Learned
    • Proper selection process
        • Quality assessment
        • Cost benefit
        • Product fits your needs
    • Library community involvement
        • Resolver affects library reference and instruction services; involve in testing and training
    • Customer support
        • Complexity and continuing change require rapid response and customizations by service provider
  • Thank you Rafal Kasprowski Electronic Resources Coordinator University of Houston Libraries [email_address]