Finalrevc
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Finalrevc

on

  • 536 views

Slides from the presentation given at Internet Llibrarian International 2010 in London on 15th October 2010.

Slides from the presentation given at Internet Llibrarian International 2010 in London on 15th October 2010.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
536
Slideshare-icon Views on SlideShare
535
Embed Views
1

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0

1 Embed 1

http://orhowilearnedtolovetheperl.com 1

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
  • Many preservation schemes emerging, including: Collaborative and Third Party Schemes: CLOCKSS & Portico National Libraries & Legal Deposit Libraries and groups of libraries: LOCKSS Alliance
  • Many preservation schemes emerging, including: Collaborative and Third Party Schemes: CLOCKSS & Portico National Libraries & Legal Deposit Libraries and groups of libraries: LOCKSS Alliance
  • Many preservation schemes emerging, including: Collaborative and Third Party Schemes: CLOCKSS & Portico National Libraries & Legal Deposit Libraries and groups of libraries: LOCKSS Alliance

Finalrevc Finalrevc Presentation Transcript

  • Finding out about the preservation of e-journals: the PEPRS Project P iloting an E -journals P reservation R egistry S ervice Fred Guy, Project Manager, EDINA, University of Edinburgh [email_address] Internet Librarian International Conference 2010 15 th October 2010
  • So What’s the Problem with E-journals?
    • 96.1% of Science journals are online
    • 86.5% of Arts and Humanities are online
    • 2006-2007 – 102,000,000 downloads
      • Up 21% from previous year
    • 17% usage is at the weekend
    • Source . E-journals: their use, value and impact. Research Information Network. UK April 2009.
  • Publication of E-Journals
  • Trends in the finances of UK higher education libraries: 1999-2009 . RIN 2010. p. 17
  • Why Worry About Digital Preservation?
    • Worries that all that is now digital may not always be available, for a variety of reasons.
        • Publishers ceases publication with no transfer
        • Publisher goes out of business with no transfer
        • Publisher taken over
  • Legal Deposit
    • Works well with print via legislation and national libraries.
    • Countries with legislation enacted (or ‘in train’) for e-materials include: Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, New Zealand, Norway, South Africa, Sweden, UK
    • But , not all countries (notably USA) and in UK the legislation supports voluntary deposit, with restrictions of mode of access
  • Why a Preservation Registry?
    • Many schemes emerging to meet challenge
    • But who is doing what?
      • How can libraries & policy-makers assess which e-journals are being archived, by what methods, and under what terms of access?
    • JISC commissioned a scoping study for an e-journals preservation registry
      • the idea had been mentioned in the literature
  • Scoping Study for a Registry
  • Scoping Study Report Precedes PEPRS
    • Rightscom / Loughborough University, 2007
      • Confirmed expressed need among libraries and policy makers
      • Warned of potential burden on digital preservation agencies
      • Recommended:
        • an e-journals preservation registry should be built
        • UK Union Catalogue of Serials (SUNCAT) or SHERPA (Open Access) get involved
          • SUNCAT is hosted and managed at EDINA
  • PROJECT DETAILS
    • Phase 1 funded by JISC (Preservation Programme) from August 2008 – July 2010
    • EDINA, University of Edinburgh, grant recipient
    • Project partner – ISSN International Centre, Paris
    • Evaluation carried out by Charles Beagrie Limited for the JISC in February 2010
  • Digital Preservation Agencies in the Pilot
      • * Two 3 rd Party Organisations
        • CLOCKSS ( C ontrolled L ots O f C opies K eeps S tuff S afe)
        • Portico
      • * Two National Libraries (c.f. legal deposit)
        • British Library (BL) British Library e-Journal Digital Archive
        • Koninklijke Bibliotheek (KB e-Depot ) KB, National Library of the Netherlands
      • * One library cooperative
        • UK LOCKSS ( L ots O f C opies K eeps S tuff S afe) Alliance
  • Data from the agencies e-Depot XML e-Depot XML UKLOCKSS sourceforge.net + spreadsheet CLOCKSS sourceforge.net + spreadsheet Portico spreadsheet Perl script to parse the data ISSN Register PEPRS Database
  • ISSN Register - steps
    • Step 1. Extract a record for each record from an agency
    • Step 2. Take the ISSN-L from each record
    • Step 3. Parse the Register to map from the ISSN-L to the associated ISSNs
    • Step 4. Load the records into a PEPRS database and link using the ISSN-L to the table with the records from the agencies.
  • Example: a search on ISSN* ‘ International Journal of High Performance Computing Applications’ * ISSN-L is used within the system to allow entry of either e-ISSN or p-ISSN
  • Finds the agencies looking after e-journal, and the volumes being preserved
  • What happens when print ISSN is entered? Key role for ISSN-L subfield
  • This displays what one of the archiving agencies, does in terms of access
  • This allows a list of e-journal titles to be checked
  • We are exploring the standards to use for m2m use of the registry servuce
  • PEPRS demonstrator
    • Demonstrator
  • Issues identified in Phase 1
    • ISSNs used by agencies
    • Holdings information supplied by the agencies
    • Vocabulary used by the agencies
  • ISSN issues
    • ISSNs missing in some agency records and some not in ISSN Register
    • Some duplicate records
    • Some p-ISSNs used as e-ISSNs
    • Some p-ISSNs linked via a common ISSN-L to a number of e-ISSNs but which one is correct?
    • Some were incorrect
  • Holdings information - variation e-Depot : Preserved: v. 1 - 36, 38 - 46. UK LOCKSS Alliance : Preserved: v. 42 - 45. In progress: v. 46, 47. Portico : Preserved: (2002-2009) v.40, v.41, v.42, v.43, v.44, v.45, v.46, v.47 .
  • Terms used by preservation agencies
  • Key recommendations from evaluation carried out in February 2010
    • Should be funding for 2 further years with an initial 6 month phase and then if reviewed successfully for another 18 months
    • Need to resolve with the agencies currency and updating of agency statements, archiving status and fields and terms to use in display.
    • Continue with the development platform until the end of 2010
    • Establish a governance structure
  • PEPRS Phase 2
    • Funding provided from August 2010 – July 2012
    • Beta service – late 2010
    • Full service – late 2011?
    • Involve international users in testing
  • PEPRS Phase 2: key stages
  • Involvement with international initiatives
    • Print Archives Program of the Center for Research Libraries – “ CRL is working with consortial partners to plan a prototype print archives framework to link existing print archiving efforts. has developed a searchable Print Archives Registry of information about print-archiving initiatives, including:
      • Projects
      • Serial Holdings .
    • HATHITrust – “…. is committed to preserving the intellectual content and in many cases the exact appearance and layout of materials digitized for deposit. HathiTrust stores and preserves metadata detailing the sequence of files for the digital object” .
  • PEPRS: Further information and Contact details
    • http://edina.ac.uk/projects/peprs/index.html
    • Fred Guy, EDINA, University of Edinburgh
    • [email_address]