Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Open Source Software for implementation of Union
                            Catalogue for Kenya

                        ...
Contents
Union Catalogue ....................................................................................................
List of Figures

Figure 1: Traditional union catalogue ......................................................................
Union Catalogue

A library catalogue is an enumeration of all information material or items found in a library
or group of...
2. Virtual
           ◦    Each catalogue remains distinct, but treated by the end-user as a single
                resour...
global cooperative. It is built and maintained collectively by the participating
libraries.(Kipaan & Nabusan, 2010)

The l...
Desirable features of a good library catalog
The next generation catalog has been discussed and ideas presented in several...
say about items found online, and value what they feel to be their peers' review of
       items.
   8. RSS feeds. Really ...
1. Patron access to all the libraries’ resources. Any participating library should be
       able to place a complete cata...
Participating libraries have to agree on the standards to adapt and the steps to be follow by
all. Figure 3 belowillustrat...
Language and script of cataloguing

Since Cataloguing rules are not static and respond to changing needs, the union catalo...
University of Nairobi                                VUBIS

           USIU                                               ...
   Vendor support costs. This is optional for open source but almost mandatory for
       proprietary.

      Hosting an...
Figure 4: ILS Selection Methodology




                                    Source: Müller, 2011, p. 59




Recommended so...
Table 2: Comparison of Koha and Evergreen, based on the qualities that make a good catalog




The two systems still requi...
The standard Cataloguing module lets you work in Marc21 or Unimarc. There is an
alternative Cataloguing module called bibl...
Figure 5: Koha's architecture




                                      Source: Sirohi & Gupta, 2010



To install Koha on...
pick values from a list. Like Authority Control, authorized values help reduce errors and
bring about consistency in catal...
Figure 6: Pines library search page, gateway to 275 libraries




                               Source: Georgia Public Li...
Extended Perl and C modules for the Apache web server have been designed for the public
interface presentation layer. All ...
Sustainable communities
Koha and Evergreen are considered sustainable communities because they both have
obtained a critic...
For cataloguing and OPAC
Both Koha and Evergreen have effective utilities for Authority control, record import, record
cre...
References

Chand, P. & Chauhan, S. K. (2008). The union catalogue of academic libraries in India: an
   initiative by INF...
RSA database management committee, (1999). In Bibliographic Database Standards.
   Retrieved Feb. 16, 2011, from
   http:/...
You’ve finished this document.
Upcoming SlideShare
Library Automation A - Z Guide: A Hands on Module
Next
Upcoming SlideShare
Library Automation A - Z Guide: A Hands on Module
Next

1

Share

Open source software for implementation of union catalogue

Adapting open source for a union catalogue in Kenya is not impossible. This is made feasible by the fact that there exist several successful union catalogs in the world. Of importance, is the agreement between the participating libraries. This is the hurdle that must be overcome before any progress is realized in this direction.

There are libraries in Kenya that have implemented open source ILS for long enough to provide the necessary expertise or input to help in the actual implementation. Koha seems to have gained much mileage in Kenya as observed earlier on. The experiences with it by the different libraries will come in handy when deciding on which software to adapt for the union catalogue.

Related Books

Free with a 30 day trial from Scribd

See all

Related Audiobooks

Free with a 30 day trial from Scribd

See all

Open source software for implementation of union catalogue

  1. 1. Open Source Software for implementation of Union Catalogue for Kenya By Beatrice Adera Amollo Head of Library & Resources, Australian Studies Institute (AUSI), Nairobi, Kenya May, 2011 Paper presented at: Workshop on ‘Modalities of Establishing a Union Catalogue for Kenya and the Standardized Integration of Local Content into a Union Catalogue, on 4th – 5th May, 2011 and thereafter at the UN/University Librarians Workshop at the Kenya College of Accountancy (KCA) on 19th May, 2011 1
  2. 2. Contents Union Catalogue ....................................................................................................................... 4 Desirable features of a good library catalog ............................................................................. 7 Prerequisite for a good union catalogue.................................................................................... 8 Bibliographic Database Standards ........................................................................................ 8 Cataloguing standards ........................................................................................................... 9 Communications format ...................................................................................................... 10 Language and script of cataloguing .................................................................................... 11 Cataloguing software used in libraries found in Kenya .......................................................... 11 Open source solutions and their suitability ............................................................................. 12 Some of the reasons why libraries migrate to open source software .................................. 12 Infrastructural and cost requirements: Proprietary versus Open ......................................... 12 Installation and data migration requirements ...................................................................... 13 Selecting software for the catalogue ....................................................................................... 13 Recommended software for the union catalogues .................................................................. 14 Koha .................................................................................................................................... 15 Koha's architecture .......................................................................................................... 16 Koha’s key Cataloguing features ..................................................................................... 17 Migrating data to Koha .................................................................................................... 18 Evergreen ............................................................................................................................ 18 Evergreen's architecture ................................................................................................... 19 Migrating data to Evergreen ............................................................................................ 20 Possible challenges. ................................................................................................................ 22 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 22 References ............................................................................................................................... 23 List of Tables Table 1: ILS in some Kenya libraries (as per the time of writing this paper) ......................... 11 Table 2: Comparison of Koha and Evergreen, based on the qualities that make a good catalog ................................................................................................................................................. 15 2
  3. 3. List of Figures Figure 1: Traditional union catalogue ....................................................................................... 4 Figure 2: Virtual Union catalogue ............................................................................................ 5 Figure 3: A workflow chart for the creation of Union Catalogue for books .......................... 10 Figure 4: ILS Selection Methodology..................................................................................... 14 Figure 5: Koha's architecture .................................................................................................. 17 Figure 6: Pines library search page, gateway to 275 libraries ................................................ 19 3
  4. 4. Union Catalogue A library catalogue is an enumeration of all information material or items found in a library or group of libraries. It contains bibliographic details and/or full text of what the library holds and is intended for a target audience. Liu & Zheng (2011) add that the library catalogue is an integral part in today's integrated library system (ILS) and has been a primary tool for users to search and locate physical materials at a library for several decades. The card catalog has been effectively replaced by the online public access catalog (OPAC) A union catalog comprises of listing of information materials, of more than one library accessed online from a single point of access. It aggregates the bibliographic details of the collections of a number of libraries. There are two types of union catalogues: 1. Traditional, where records from multiple sources are incorporated into a single database. ◦ Uses ISO 2709 standard - Information and documentation—Format for information exchange. ◦ MARC21 is coded using this format Figure 1: Traditional union catalogue Source: Research 4
  5. 5. 2. Virtual ◦ Each catalogue remains distinct, but treated by the end-user as a single resource.  Uses Z39.50 Search and Retrieve standard Figure 2: Virtual Union catalogue Source: Research Union catalogs assists in locating and requesting materials from other libraries through interlibrary loan service. They allow library users to search through the various libraries’ collections as though they were searching their own library. The users may request materials through the union catalog and have the transaction handled completely as a circulation transaction otherwise known as circulation-based resource sharing. The participating libraries in the union catalogue, of course, are free to specify whether their collection is available for Interlibrary Loan. One of the well known union catalog containing one of the largest and giant electronic databases is WorldCat. WorldCat is a union catalog which itemizes the collections of 71,000 libraries in 112 countries which participate in the Online Computer Library Center (OCLC) 5
  6. 6. global cooperative. It is built and maintained collectively by the participating libraries.(Kipaan & Nabusan, 2010) The logical function of any union catalogue is resource sharing and document supply and it is high time that member libraries make use of this database in order to initiate such services. Before the advent of CD-ROMs and the worldwide web, online access or searching meant that connections were made to a remote computer via a modem to perform literature searches. The growth of online public access catalogues (OPAC) and online searching has come to mean the searching of any computerized database, no matter where it is situated, whether on a PC’s hard disk, on a CD-ROM, or on a remote database server. (Chand & Chauhan, 2008) In their general review of the union catalogues, Chelak & Azadeh (2010) highlight the advantages of union catalogue. They list the following advantages for the library: Facilities for cataloguing and improvements in the speed of cataloguing. Increase in the supply of quality records, both bibliographic and authority. Development and maintenance of mutually acceptable standards. Development of a document supply service. Development of joint collections, printed and electronic ones. Links to document suppliers and electronic journals. Use of shared resources. Ongoing discussion, planning and programming among participant libraries. The production of a national bibliographic network Reduction in acquisition and cataloguing expenses. The advantages for users include among others: confirmation of the existence of an item; accurate known locations for an item; availability at those known locations; timeframe for user need; and licensing controls and authorization. 6
  7. 7. Desirable features of a good library catalog The next generation catalog has been discussed and ideas presented in several library fora. Some of the qualities drawn from a presentation by Yang, Hofmann & Weeks in 2009 at a conference include:- 1. Single point of entry for all library information. The library catalog should allow single search of or for all library materials. This includes records of all print items and links to the library’s electronic databases and digital collections. One search should retrieve all the relevant materials. 2. Web interface. Library catalog should look and feel like popular search engines such as Google or Yahoo. It should have a modern design similar to commercial, e- business sites. 3. Enriched content. A good library catalog could have book cover images, user driven input such as comments, descriptions, ratings, and tag clouds. 4. Categorized searching. Library catalogs should be able to display the search results as sets of categories based on some criterion such as dates, languages, availability, formats, locations, etc. Users can conduct a very simple, initial search by their preferred keyword method and then refine their results by clicking on the various results facets. Simple keyword search box on every page. The catalog should start with a simple keyword search box that looks like that of the various search engines. A link to the ‘advanced search’ option should also be provided. The simple search box should appear on every page of the interface as users navigate and conduct searches. Librarians prefer an advanced search and feel that the quick search is more likely to produce results with less precision. 5. Relevancy. The catalog should rank performed searches by relevancy. This should be with as much precision as possible. 6. Recommendations/related materials. A good catalog should recommend books for readers on transaction logs. This should take the form of “Readers who borrowed this book also borrowed the following … ” or a link to “Recommended Readings”. 7. User contribution. The catalog should allow users to add data to records. The user input includes descriptions, summaries, reviews, criticism, comments, rating and ranking, and tagging. Today's users increasingly look for what other users have to 7
  8. 8. say about items found online, and value what they feel to be their peers' review of items. 8. RSS feeds. Really Simple Syndication allows users to connect themselves to content that is often updated. The catalog interface could include RSS feeds so that users can have new book lists, top-circulating book lists and “watch this topic” connections to the catalog on their own blog or feed reader page. 9. Integration with social network sites. When a library's catalog is integrated with social network sites, patrons can share links to library items with their friends on social networks like Facebook and Twitter. 10. Persistent links. There should be stable URLs, capable of being copied and pasted and serving as a permanent link to individual library records. Prerequisite for a good union catalogue Bibliographic Database Standards Even though there are common standards for all libraries, it is common to find that catalogue records in most databases are different; they do not conform to one specific cataloguing standard. Lack of consistency, typographical errors and uniformity would be the main challenge in setting up the union catalogue. The individual library databases may also contain records in various formats, which would lead to much complication and editing of records. If different libraries are to merge their records or decide to use a single point for access to all their collections, then compromises have to be met and standards set to ensure uniformity and ease of access for the final users. There are several accepted standards and norms that have been adapted by the libraries to ensure professionalism and conformity. Professionals in the field of librarianship must at one point be trained on the adapted standards and methods for cataloguing. The standards ensure that the union catalogue help the libraray to fulfill its functions. The Alliance Library system (ALS, 1999) of Illinois in America outlines four library activities in its bibliographic database standards, that depend on a good union catalogue. These are: 8
  9. 9. 1. Patron access to all the libraries’ resources. Any participating library should be able to place a complete catalog of all its holdings in any location where a terminal can be installed. Accuracy, timeliness and consistency in the data entry is therefore important. 2. Enhanced circulation services to patrons. Services like holds, and inquiry into a book's status should be possible. This can only be accomplished if the entry for the book is accurate and access points are provided. 3. Resource sharing. The exchange of information among libraries requires consistency of entry. It is imperative for all the libraries to provide cataloging and access information consistently and accurately for the benefit of other libraries, as well as for local patrons. 4. Item conversion and maintenance. Rapid, accurate conversion and maintenance of item information is crucial. This is greatly enhanced by accurate and complete cataloging information. Cataloguing standards It is essential that every member library provides accurate and standard data by using agreed upon bibliographic standards. Since the computer cannot distinguish between good and substandard cataloging, each library has to accept the responsibility of abiding by the standards. Some examples of some internationally accepted developed standards for record input include: Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules, for bibliographic description. Library of Congress Subject Headings. OCLC Bibliographic Formats and Standards. Full MARC coding (tags, indicators and subfield codes) is required on all fields input Library of Congress Rule Interpretations (LCRI) Dewey Decimal Classification MARC21 9
  10. 10. Participating libraries have to agree on the standards to adapt and the steps to be follow by all. Figure 3 belowillustrates the typical procedure for developing a union catalogue. The level of cataloguing should also be decided. In addition to already set library standards, the libraries should be free to set local standards to suit the specific needs and requirements of a database containing locally produced information material. Figure 3: A workflow chart for the creation of Union Catalogue for books Adapted from Chand & Chauhan (2008) Communications format Converting printed catalogue to machine-readable bibliographic records is done via fields, which include tags, subfields and field delimiters. All the participating libraries must be ready to use the common format to ease transfer or uploading of data. Simplified guidelines regarding the use of format should be published and distributed to all the libraries. For instance, MARC has provided a core common semantic base to facilitate the adoption of different systems through MARC export/import processes. 10
  11. 11. Language and script of cataloguing Since Cataloguing rules are not static and respond to changing needs, the union catalogue will need to conform to our unique and local needs. To accommodate information material that is non-English, the union catalogue will include vernacular data so as to support resource discovery of our extensive non-English collections. The language of cataloguing however should still remain English. Cataloguing software used in libraries found in Kenya Most libraries in Kenya have installed in-house or commercial ILS to serve their cataloguing needs. The decision concerning what software or system to install is usually made by the Librarian. The librarian bases this decision on the allocated budget from the parent institution, size of the library’s collection and perceived suitability of the software. Suitability may be based on the impression given by the vendor or the popularity of the software in other similar libraries. ILS software installed in a few sampled libraries in Kenya are given in the table below. Table 1: ILS in some Kenya libraries (as per the time of writing this paper) Institution Software AUSI Koha Commission of Higher education Koha Egerton University AMLIB Gretsa University Koha ILRI InMagic Inoorero University Mandarin Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology Koha Kenya Polytechnic University Koha Kenyatta University Koha KIM Koha Moi University In progress St. Paul’s University Koha Strathmore Koha 11
  12. 12. University of Nairobi VUBIS USIU Symphony World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF) InMagic Source: Research Several libraries in Kenya have migrated or adapted OSS and Koha seems to be the main choice for those opting for an open source solution. Open source solutions and their suitability Examples of open source ILS include Emilda, Evergreen, Gnuteca, InfoCid, Jayuya, Koha, NewGenLib, oBiblio, OPALS, OpenAmapthe`que, OpenBiblio, PhpMyLibrary, PMB and Senayan. Some of the reasons why libraries migrate to open source software Disillusionment with current vendors Open source is seen as a solution to: o Allow libraries to have more flexible systems o Lower costs Not be vulnerable to disruptions that come with mergers and acquisitions Open source is beginning to emerge as a mainstream option. No vendor lock in. Even though the initial cost might be minimal, in the long run, the TOC (Total Cost of Ownership) is still roughly equal to proprietary commercial model Infrastructural and cost requirements: Proprietary versus Open  Costs shifted from traditional software licensing models. There is no initial purchase of license or annual license fees  Hardware costs are the same for both. 12
  13. 13.  Vendor support costs. This is optional for open source but almost mandatory for proprietary.  Hosting and Conversion services same in both.  Local technical support may be higher in the open source option. Installation and data migration requirements To install and migrate data to an open source ILS, the services of a systems librarian or librarian with technical or IT skill will be required. Most of the open source communities have strived to develop manual and documentation that makes it possible for the systems librarian to learn how to do this. The support communities ensure that users and developers interact to sustain effective use of the open source systems. Library professionals without technical training can also make use of OSS applications, which alleviates the library's need for lengthy prior training. Most Open Source software products do not require knowledge of programming or mark-up languages in order to implement or customize an OSS product. (Payne & Singh, 2010) Selecting software for the catalogue Before choosing suitable software, one must select and evaluate several. There are quite a number of open source ILS in the market currently. Müller (2011) states that the three most common things to consider when selecting OSS are the licensing agreements, support community and functionalities of the software. (Figure I) 13
  14. 14. Figure 4: ILS Selection Methodology Source: Müller, 2011, p. 59 Recommended software for the union catalogues Based on the three evaluation factors suggested by Müller (2011) above and the good qualities of a library catalog (Yang, Hofmann & Weeks, 2009), the author recommends Koha and Evergreen as the most suitable open source software for the union catalogue. Evergreen supports state-wide consortium while Koha is used in a multi-site public library systems. The two are the most suitable even though they do not posses all the qualities of a next generation online catalog. A comparison of the two OSS has also been made, based on the above listed desirable qualities of a good catalog. (Table 2) 14
  15. 15. Table 2: Comparison of Koha and Evergreen, based on the qualities that make a good catalog The two systems still require some work to improve on the missing qualities. Koha possess most of the qualities than any other OSS. Koha Koha was developed in New Zealand by Katipo Communications Ltd and first went live in Jan 2000 in Horowhenua Library Trust. It was the first Open Source Library Management System and is widely used all over the world by all types of libraries. It is a fully featured library system with all the common modules you would expect from a modern ILS. It includes Searching, Circulation, Cataloguing, Acquisitions and Serials. It has a web client which means there is no need to install any client software on user computers. It only needs a browser. However Koha is developed with Firefox as the preferred platform and some of the features may not work properly with Internet Explorer. Koha’s OPAC has plenty of Web 2.0 features, RSS feeds, Tags, Reviews, Book Covers and Faceted Searching. (Table 2). 15
  16. 16. The standard Cataloguing module lets you work in Marc21 or Unimarc. There is an alternative Cataloguing module called biblios, also free, that has a more technical Marc look and feel for experienced cataloguers, and includes access to a co-operative type repository of Marc records. Koha has over 500 libraries committed to it from different parts of the world. f Koha’s features outlined:  Full-featured ILS: Koha has modules for circulation, cataloging, acquisitions, serials, reserves, patron management, branch relationships, and more.  Dual database design: Koha supports both text based and real time database management systems.  Library standards compliant: Koha’s interoperability with other systems and technologies makes it attractive. It supports existing library work flows and tools.  Web based interface: Koha has a very user friendly web based interface which uses web technologies like XHTML, CSS & Javascript.  No vendor: since Koha is an open source project, there is no vendor lock in. Anyone can participate in its development.  Usability: The online public access catalog (OPAC) is user friendly.  Basic performance: The average query is handled quickly enough to meet user expectations. (www.koha.org; Zico, 2009) Koha's architecture Koha runs on the Linux, Apache2, MySQL, Perl (LAMP) platform: 1. Linux: The operating system 2. Apache2: The web server 3. MySQL: The database server 4. Perl: Koha is written in the Perl programming language 16
  17. 17. Figure 5: Koha's architecture Source: Sirohi & Gupta, 2010 To install Koha one requires to: Install various packages related to: o The Koha architecture above—Linux, Apache, MySQL, and Perl o The Koha application itself Build and compiler programs that help with the installation Various Perl and non Perl packages that Koha uses, along with their own prerequisites. Koha’s key Cataloguing features Koha's MARC frameworks MARC frameworks are cataloging templates for different types of material in the library. Koha's MARC frameworks are a way to simplify catalog data entry, also to control what gets entered. Authority Control & Authorized values Data entry into bibliographic fields can be controlled using Authority Control. Bibliographic cataloguers cannot enter text in fields under Authority Control; they can only pick values from the list of authority records. Authorized values are Koha’s additional way of controlling data entry. These are lists of values that can be linked to any bibliographic field or subfield. Catalogers are not able to enter free text in fields that are controlled through authorized values; they are only able to 17
  18. 18. pick values from a list. Like Authority Control, authorized values help reduce errors and bring about consistency in catalog records. Migrating data to Koha Migrating catalog data from previous library system is a prerequisite to using Koha for most libraries. The process involves exporting MARC records from the old system and importing them into Koha using Koha's import tools. Migrating bibliographic data is usually easy; holdings data, however, presents a few challenges. This stems from the fact that different library systems record holdings data in different ways—fields and subfields used for an element may be different. In some cases, certain fields used in Koha may not be directly available in the holdings field. To import the data into Koha, one has to first convert the source MARC File into a Koha- compatible file using MARCEdit—a free MARC editor. The converted file is then imported using one of Koha's imports tools: • bulkmarckimport.pl: A Linux command-line tool usually used to import large MARC files • GUI import tool: A more flexible import tool available in Koha's staff client (Sirohi & Gupta, 2010) Evergreen Evergreen has attracted worldwide interest since its introduction in 2006. It has a large network installed base, including the Georgia Library PINES network of over 200 libraries. Evergreen, like Koha, has a CGI (Common Gateway Interface) mode of server operation, but has clearly been able to support the PINES network. 18
  19. 19. Figure 6: Pines library search page, gateway to 275 libraries Source: Georgia Public Library Service, 2010 Evergreen's architecture As an open source ILS, Evergreen has a very unique system architecture utilizing various open source projects. Its server-side services, which have been developed in the computer languages C and Perl, are handling all kinds of requests including authentication, storage and circulation. Evergreen's unique message core is called open scalable request framework (OpenSRF) built on Ejabber, an open source real time instant messaging service. The OpenSRF not only provides secure message passing and scalable architecture, but a simple application- programming interface (API) for application developers. 19
  20. 20. Extended Perl and C modules for the Apache web server have been designed for the public interface presentation layer. All requests from the public interface are formed in the JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) format and then directed to the proper server service. XML formatted result data are returned. However, the Apache C modules interpret XML data into XHTML pages, which modern browsers are able to understand and render them for users. In the database layer, Evergreen utilises the powerful open source database management software, PostgreSQL. The storage service connects to the database, sends search requests to the database, and receives search results from the database. The staff client, built on the XML user interface language (XUL), can easily be set up on Windows and Mac X operating systems and is not limited to Linux. Also the following features of Evergreen are crucial to the process of localization: the server side of Evergreen runs on Linux; Evergreen fully supports Unicode Transformation Format 8 (UTF-8); Evergreen leverages the Tsearch2 for indexing and searching; and Evergreen stores records in MARC XML format. Migrating data to Evergreen According to Evergreen documentation, migrating data into Evergreen can be one of the most daunting tasks for an administrator. Advanced ILS Administration experience, knowledge of Evergreen data structures, as well as knowledge of how to export data from the current system or access to data export files from the current system is necessary. However, several tools for importing bibliographic records into Evergreen can be found in the Evergreen installation folder. (Evergreen Community, 2010) Apart from their functionalities, other reasons for recommending these two systems are discussed below. 20
  21. 21. Sustainable communities Koha and Evergreen are considered sustainable communities because they both have obtained a critical mass of interested developers, contributors, and users. The Koha community shows great attractiveness and sustainability because of the following: (1) A good number of companies and business consultants providing worldwide support for the product. More than 19 companies throughout the world can be identified each offering software counseling, support, training, accommodation, etc. (2) A very high degree of integration by adopting two Marc formats (Marc21 and Unimarc) and system availability in more than 25 languages. There is therefore potential here to develop the system in a Kenyan language. (3) The development and renewal of its leadership. There is a different administrator for each version. (4) The size of its community of developers and contributors (over 50 people) is spread across dozens of countries. The Evergreen community also shows great potential based on its vitality and sustainability: (1) The rapid growth of its community of developers and contributors. (2) The high caliber of its developers and contributors. They come from consortia of public libraries and academic library systems from all over the world. (3) The high levels of user satisfaction as demonstrated by the annual user survey and journals publications. Networking and sharing Evergreen and Koha were both born out of consortial administration of resources spread among multiple libraries, and this is reflected in the software’s internal operations by the number of options and its overall ease of implementation. Shared administration is not limited to the catalog and applies also to bibliographic records, authority records, categories of documents, patron records, patron preferences, budgetary funds, etc. It is also possible to treat all branches as independent, but still share a common catalog. 21
  22. 22. For cataloguing and OPAC Both Koha and Evergreen have effective utilities for Authority control, record import, record creation and record export, duplicate checking, thesaurus management, search capability, documentation, web-based visibility and saved search capability. Possible challenges  Existing variations in cataloguing practice for the libraries. This includes authority control and how to reduce variations in the treatment of personal names or subjects.  Conversion of records to a standardized format will take a bit of time and effort since the cooperation of those in charge of the libraries will be essential. Additional resources (time and space) from each participating library will be required for the realization of a union catalogue in Kenya.  In the case of a virtual catalogue there is no control on error checking and data harmonization. Conclusion Adapting open source for a union catalogue in Kenya is not impossible. This is made feasible by the fact that there exist several successful union catalogs in the world. Of importance, is the agreement between the participating libraries. This is the hurdle that must be overcome before any progress is realized in this direction. There are libraries in Kenya that have implemented open source ILS for long enough to provide the necessary expertise or input to help in the actual implementation. Koha seems to have gained much mileage in Kenya as observed earlier on. The experiences with it by the different libraries will come in handy when deciding on which software to adapt for the union catalogue. Evergreen has blazed a new trail and as a result of its design, its development philosophy, and developments in information technology, it has spread rapidly and others are in the process of emulating it. (Molyneux & Rylande 2010). That is for the good, because more consortial software and more cooperation among members of the open source communities in the library world will make libraries stronger and give them more choices in available software to run their libraries. 22
  23. 23. References Chand, P. & Chauhan, S. K. (2008). The union catalogue of academic libraries in India: an initiative by INFLIBNET. Interlending & Document Supply, 36(3), 142-148. Chelak, Fereydoon Azadeh, A. M. & Azadeh, F. (2010). The development of union catalogues in Iran: the need for a web based catalogue. Interlending & Document Supply, 38(2), 118-125. Evergreen Community, (2011). Evergreen 2.0 Documentation. (Draft Version). Retrieved Mar. 16, 2011, from http://docs.evergreen-ils.org/2.0/draft/html/index.html Georgia Public Library Service, (2011). Evergreen Project web site Retrieved from http://www.open-ils.org/ Kipaan, L. & Rhea, J. N. (2010). An Internet Miniguide compilation to the graduate program in education (Saint Loius University, Baguio City). Master Thesis, Master in Library & Information technology LibLime & the Koha Development Team, (2011). Koha web site Retrieved from http://www.koha.org/ Liu, G. & Zheng, H. (2011). Access to serials: integrating SFX with Evergreen open source ILS. Library Hi Tech, 9(1), 137-148. Molyneux, R. E. & Rylande R, M. (2010). The state of Evergreen: Evergreen at three. Library Review, 59(9), 667-676. Müller, T. (2011). How to Choose an Free and Open Source Integrated Library System. OCLC Systems & Services: International digital library perspectives, 27(1), 57-78. Payne, A. & Singh, V. (2010). Open source software use in libraries. Library Review, 59(9), 708-717. 23
  24. 24. RSA database management committee, (1999). In Bibliographic Database Standards. Retrieved Feb. 16, 2011, from http://www.alliancelibrarysystem.com/RSADocuments/file... Resource Sharing Alliance of the Alliance Library System Sirohi, S. & Gupta, A. (2010). Koha 3 Library Management System. New Delhi: Packt. Walls, I. (2011). Migrating from Innovative Interfaces’ Millennium to Koha: The NYU Health Sciences Libraries’ experiences. OCLC Systems & Services, 27(1), 51-56. Yang, S., Hofmann, M. A., & Weeks, M. (2009). Koha, Evergreen, and Voyager: A comparison of their OPACs. CUS Tenth Annual Users’ conference. Zico, M. (2009). Developing an Integrated Library System (ILS) using open source (School of Engineering and Computer Science of BRAC University) Masters Thesis Zou, Q. & Liu, G. (2009). Chinese localisation of Evergreen: an open source integrated library system. Program: electronic library and information systems, 43(1), 49-61. 24
  • gautham26

    Jan. 5, 2021

Adapting open source for a union catalogue in Kenya is not impossible. This is made feasible by the fact that there exist several successful union catalogs in the world. Of importance, is the agreement between the participating libraries. This is the hurdle that must be overcome before any progress is realized in this direction. There are libraries in Kenya that have implemented open source ILS for long enough to provide the necessary expertise or input to help in the actual implementation. Koha seems to have gained much mileage in Kenya as observed earlier on. The experiences with it by the different libraries will come in handy when deciding on which software to adapt for the union catalogue.

Views

Total views

5,625

On Slideshare

0

From embeds

0

Number of embeds

2

Actions

Downloads

0

Shares

0

Comments

0

Likes

1

×