The document discusses the shift from print to online scholarly journals and the implications for digital preservation. It summarizes a 2006 study that evaluated 12 digital preservation initiatives across criteria like mission, rights, services, and organizational viability. While options for preservation are emerging, coverage is uneven and much scholarly content remains at risk without access to trusted third-party archives. The document concludes by recommending libraries submit content to certified archives like LOCKSS and Portico and consider further studies on archiving their own core journal collections.
Networking Repositories, Optimizing Impact: Georgia Knowledge Repository MeetingKaren S Calhoun
Prepared as the keynote for the Georgia Knowledge Repository's annual meeting, this presentation discusses why repositories are important, the challenges they face, and solutions or opportunities for networking repositories and optimizing their impact for local, regional and global communities.
Delivered by Peter Burnhill, Director of EDINA, at the PRELIDA Consolidation and Dissemination workshop on 17/18 October 2014 (http://prelida.eu/consolidation-workshop).
Summary: The web changes over time, and significant reference rot inevitably occurs. Web archiving delivers only a 50% chance of success. So in addition to the original URI, the link should be augmented with temporal context to increase robustness.
Networking Repositories, Optimizing Impact: Georgia Knowledge Repository MeetingKaren S Calhoun
Prepared as the keynote for the Georgia Knowledge Repository's annual meeting, this presentation discusses why repositories are important, the challenges they face, and solutions or opportunities for networking repositories and optimizing their impact for local, regional and global communities.
Delivered by Peter Burnhill, Director of EDINA, at the PRELIDA Consolidation and Dissemination workshop on 17/18 October 2014 (http://prelida.eu/consolidation-workshop).
Summary: The web changes over time, and significant reference rot inevitably occurs. Web archiving delivers only a 50% chance of success. So in addition to the original URI, the link should be augmented with temporal context to increase robustness.
The panel will focus on a pilot project to ensure that all stakeholders understand the services and infrastructures to be included in the DMPs by the granting councils and CFI.
Library Assessment Toolkit & Dashboard Scoping Research Final Report and Path...Megan Hurst
Athenaeum21 is pleased to announce the public release of “Library Assessment Toolkit & Dashboard Scoping Research Final Report and Path Forward." The report is the culmination of a six-month research project in collaboration with the University Library of the University of California, Davis; the Bodleian Libraries of the University of Oxford; and the Staats und Universitätsbibliothek, Göttingen, Germany. The research project examined how libraries currently assess their resources and services, and areas of opportunity to streamline and visualize library performance through a common and customizable set of key performance indicators (KPIs) and dashboard modules. The research team interviewed library assessment leaders and practitioners across diverse institutions and geographies, and reviewed the current landscape of technology, tools, and services addressing their needs.
[Click and drag to move]
The report concludes that "the majority of library managers approach assessment and evaluation in an ad hoc and reactive manner as questions arise. Managers spend valuable time manually collecting, cleaning, and normalizing data from diverse systems, and then perform one-time or static interpretations. The library managers that we interviewed during our research felt that the availability of a toolkit and dashboard could free them to probe and interpret more data, think more strategically, and develop more meaningful questions about measuring and evaluating library performance. While the scoping research focused on the performance of research libraries, the proposed toolkit and dashboard framework could be adopted and customized by any type of library, including smaller college and university libraries, community college libraries, and public libraries. Institutionalizing the project through sponsorship by an appropriate body or syndicate of libraries would help assure its extensibility nationally and internationally."
Presented by Peter Burnhill and Lisa Otty at 36th Annual IATUL Conference in Hannover, Germany, 5 - 9 July 2015 “Strategic Partnerships for Access and Discovery”
Capture All the URLs: First Steps in Web ArchivingKristen Yarmey
Presentation for a Society of American Archivists Web Archiving Roundtable professional development webinar.
Session Description:
Two co-authors, Alexis Antracoli, Records Management Archivist at Drexel University and Kristen Yarmey, Associate Professor and Digital Services Librarian at the University of
Scranton will share their experiences and engage in discussion about their web archiving projects. The work they will be talking about is covered in “Capture All the URLs: First Steps in Web Archiving” (http://palrap.pitt.edu/ojs/index.php/palrap/article/view/67).
Kristen will discuss her and her colleagues’ first steps in web archiving at the University of Scranton, including making the case to campus stakeholders, finding funding, choosing Archive-It as well as selecting content and seeds to capture. Alexis will talk about establishing policies and implementing QA procedures. Both Alexis and Kristen will provide
insights on stumbling blocks, lessons learned, and future plans. Plenty of time will be allotted for questions and discussion.
Presented by Adam Rusbridge at e-Journals are forever? Preservation and Continuing Access to e-journal Content. A DPC, EDINA and JISC joint initiative, British Library, London, 26 April 2010.
How Portable Are the Metadata Standards for Scientific Data?Jian Qin
The one-covers-all approach in current metadata standards for scientific data has serious limitations in keeping up with the ever-growing data. This paper reports the findings from a survey to metadata standards in the scientific data domain and argues for the need for a metadata infrastructure. The survey collected 4400+ unique elements from 16 standards and categorized these elements into 9 categories. Findings from the data included that the highest counts of element occurred in the descriptive category and many of them overlapped with DC elements. This pattern also repeated in the elements co-occurred in different standards. A small number of semantically general elements appeared across the largest numbers of standards while the rest of the element co-occurrences formed a long tail with a wide range of specific semantics. The paper discussed implications of the findings in the context of metadata portability and infrastructure and pointed out that large, complex standards and widely varied naming practices are the major hurdles for building a metadata infrastructure.
The panel will focus on a pilot project to ensure that all stakeholders understand the services and infrastructures to be included in the DMPs by the granting councils and CFI.
Library Assessment Toolkit & Dashboard Scoping Research Final Report and Path...Megan Hurst
Athenaeum21 is pleased to announce the public release of “Library Assessment Toolkit & Dashboard Scoping Research Final Report and Path Forward." The report is the culmination of a six-month research project in collaboration with the University Library of the University of California, Davis; the Bodleian Libraries of the University of Oxford; and the Staats und Universitätsbibliothek, Göttingen, Germany. The research project examined how libraries currently assess their resources and services, and areas of opportunity to streamline and visualize library performance through a common and customizable set of key performance indicators (KPIs) and dashboard modules. The research team interviewed library assessment leaders and practitioners across diverse institutions and geographies, and reviewed the current landscape of technology, tools, and services addressing their needs.
[Click and drag to move]
The report concludes that "the majority of library managers approach assessment and evaluation in an ad hoc and reactive manner as questions arise. Managers spend valuable time manually collecting, cleaning, and normalizing data from diverse systems, and then perform one-time or static interpretations. The library managers that we interviewed during our research felt that the availability of a toolkit and dashboard could free them to probe and interpret more data, think more strategically, and develop more meaningful questions about measuring and evaluating library performance. While the scoping research focused on the performance of research libraries, the proposed toolkit and dashboard framework could be adopted and customized by any type of library, including smaller college and university libraries, community college libraries, and public libraries. Institutionalizing the project through sponsorship by an appropriate body or syndicate of libraries would help assure its extensibility nationally and internationally."
Presented by Peter Burnhill and Lisa Otty at 36th Annual IATUL Conference in Hannover, Germany, 5 - 9 July 2015 “Strategic Partnerships for Access and Discovery”
Capture All the URLs: First Steps in Web ArchivingKristen Yarmey
Presentation for a Society of American Archivists Web Archiving Roundtable professional development webinar.
Session Description:
Two co-authors, Alexis Antracoli, Records Management Archivist at Drexel University and Kristen Yarmey, Associate Professor and Digital Services Librarian at the University of
Scranton will share their experiences and engage in discussion about their web archiving projects. The work they will be talking about is covered in “Capture All the URLs: First Steps in Web Archiving” (http://palrap.pitt.edu/ojs/index.php/palrap/article/view/67).
Kristen will discuss her and her colleagues’ first steps in web archiving at the University of Scranton, including making the case to campus stakeholders, finding funding, choosing Archive-It as well as selecting content and seeds to capture. Alexis will talk about establishing policies and implementing QA procedures. Both Alexis and Kristen will provide
insights on stumbling blocks, lessons learned, and future plans. Plenty of time will be allotted for questions and discussion.
Presented by Adam Rusbridge at e-Journals are forever? Preservation and Continuing Access to e-journal Content. A DPC, EDINA and JISC joint initiative, British Library, London, 26 April 2010.
How Portable Are the Metadata Standards for Scientific Data?Jian Qin
The one-covers-all approach in current metadata standards for scientific data has serious limitations in keeping up with the ever-growing data. This paper reports the findings from a survey to metadata standards in the scientific data domain and argues for the need for a metadata infrastructure. The survey collected 4400+ unique elements from 16 standards and categorized these elements into 9 categories. Findings from the data included that the highest counts of element occurred in the descriptive category and many of them overlapped with DC elements. This pattern also repeated in the elements co-occurred in different standards. A small number of semantically general elements appeared across the largest numbers of standards while the rest of the element co-occurrences formed a long tail with a wide range of specific semantics. The paper discussed implications of the findings in the context of metadata portability and infrastructure and pointed out that large, complex standards and widely varied naming practices are the major hurdles for building a metadata infrastructure.
Digital Repositories: Essential Information for Academic LibrariansJeffrey Beall
This presentation provides essential information for academic librarians about digital repositories.It describes institutional, disciplinary, and data repositories and gives examples of each. The presentation also looks at the current state of access, focusing on OAI-PMH, and it examines digital preservation for IRs. Academic libraries that host repositories essentially become publishers, and this responsibility has many implications for libraries. The talk closes with a brief look at the proposed "all-scholarship repository" (ASR).
Come Together: Interdepartmental Collaboration to Connect the IR and Library ...NASIG
Presenter: Amanda Makula, University Of San Diego
While institutional repositories (IRs) often include a built-in searching mechanism and/or are indexed by web search engines, what about our patrons who go straight to the library catalog with their information need? Rather than hope that users will stumble upon the IR from the library website or assume that they will start their research with a Google search, librarians can facilitate greater IR discoverability and usage by integrating its content into the library catalog. With strong teamwork, good communication, and a shared vision, this endeavor helps transform the IR and library catalog from separate, siloed platforms into a more cohesive collections package.
At the University of San Diego, librarians and administrators across three departments -- Technical Services, Systems, and Archives / Special Collections / Digital Initiatives --recognized this opportunity and came together to share information and work in concert to explore and enact the benefits of auto-harvesting IR content into the library catalog. Driven by a vision of providing enhanced discoverability and access, as well as promoting the IR as a whole and enriching the catalog, the team members worked cooperatively to identify specific IR collections appropriate for harvest, investigate technical logistics, consult outside vendors (including Innovative and bepress), and experiment with implementation.
Bibliographic Infrastructure for Shared Print ManagementConstance Malpas
Slides from ALCTS pre-conference on Shared Print Management, 5 June 2012. Outlines strategy behind OCLC Print Archives Disclosure Pilot project. (First part of session; second half was by Lizanne Payne, on detailed metadata guidelines.)
"Filling the digital preservation gap" with ArchivematicaJenny Mitcham
A presentation given by Jenny Mitcham at the iPRES conference on 6th November 2015 in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It describes work underway in the "Filling the Digital Preservation Gap" project using Archivematica to preserve research data
In this session we explore the birth of digital preservation, examine what it is and what it is not, and look at the challenges that preservation of multiple formats of digital scholarship brings. We look at the types of content that are currently being preserved, and consider the formats that will need to be preserved in the future. We also discuss what it is not possible to preserve – by today’s technologies at least!
2013 CrossRef Annual Meeting United in Preservation - Randy Kiefer and Kate W...Crossref
In this presentation, Randy Kiefer from CLOCKSS and Kate Wittenberg from Portico will discuss the importance of digital preservation, what preservation is and is not, and the reasons why preservation needs to be supported by the library and publishing communities.
This presentation was provided by Marshall Breeding, Independent Consultant and Founder of Library Technology Guides; Co-Chair, ODI Working Group, at the
2012 NISO Standards Update at ALA.
Presented at the OCLC Research Library Partnership meeting by Senior Program Officer, Karen Smith-Yoshimura and hosted by the University of Sydney in Sydney, NSW Australia, 17 February 2017. This meeting provided an opportunity for Research Library Partners to touch base with each other on issues of common concern and explore possible areas of future engagement with the OCLC Research Library Partnership and OCLC Research.
1. Shift to Online: implications for preserving
scholarly communications
Daniel Dollar
Head, Collection Development & Management
Cushing/Whitney Medical Library
Yale School of Medicine
daniel.dollar@yale.edu
4. Shifting Formats
• Content
• Online journal is the version of record
• Digital backfiles (include everything)
• Scholarly Sharing
• Interlibrary loan
• Fair use
• Licensing
• Pricing models
• Usage
• COUNTER compliant
5. Shifting Formats
• Accessibility
• Easy and clear path to content with few/no clicks
• No passwords please
• OpenURL compliant
• Ownership
• Purchase content not lease it
• Perpetual or archival access rights
• Post-cancellation access to subscribed content
• Preservation
• Use trusted third-party preservation archive(s)
6. Preservation: Problem Statement
Digital preservation represents one of the grand challenges
facing higher education. Yet… the responsibility for
preservation is diffuse and the responsible parties have
been slow to identify and invest in the necessary infra-
structure. The shift from print to electronic publication
of scholarly journals is occurring at a particularly rapid
pace; the digital portion of the scholarly record is in-
creasingly at risk and solutions may require unique ar-
rangements within the academy for sharing preservation
responsibility.
Adapted from "Urgent Action Needed to Preserve Scholarly
Electronic Journals," Don Waters et al, 10/2005
7. Preservation: Study
• Association of Research Libraries (ARL) and the
Council on Library and Information Resources
(CLIR) agree on the need for survey of online
journal archiving initiatives.
• CLIR commissioned study with a report issued in
September 2006, entitled E-Journal Archiving
Metes and Bounds: A Survey of the Landscape.
8. Contents
• Includes: the "who, what, when, where, why,
and how" of significant archiving programs
operated by not-for-profit organizations in the
domain of peer reviewed journal literature
published in digital form.
• Excludes: preservation efforts covering
digitized versions of print journals (i.e.,
JSTOR), library conversion projects, publisher
efforts, and initiatives in planning stages.
9. Twelve initiatives studied
• Government mandated/funded (6):
• Koninklijke Bibliotheek - e-Depot (Dutch national
deposit library)
• Kopal - DDB (National Library of Germany &
Ministry of Education & Research)
• CISTI - Csi (Canadian national science library)
• NLA-Pandora (Preserving and Accessing Networked
Documentary Resources of Australia)
• PubMed Central (National Institutes of Health-
National Library of Medicine)
• LANL-RL aDORe (Los Alamos National Laboratory
Research Library)
11. Seven indicators of viability
1. Explicit mission & necessary mandate to perform
long-term archiving
2. Negotiate all rights and responsibilities to carry out
its obligations
3. Identify exactly which titles are covered and for
whom
4. Provide a minimal set of defined services - receive,
store, verify integrity, guard against loss, be
auditable (certification)
12. Seven indicators of viability
5. Preserved information available to libraries under
clearly stated conditions
6. Organizationally sound
7. Work as part of a network
13. What about content coverage?
• Proved difficult to identify which publications
are being archived, by whom
• Not all publish lists; not all have complete, up
to date titles (this is complicated)
• Not all of a publishers' titles necessarily
included in a collection (PubMed Central has
largest number of publishers & smallest number
of titles)
• Aggregators such as Muse, BioOne, etc., add
complexity
14. Content coverage (2)
• Participation in the 12 (2006 data):
• Number of unique publishers was 128
• 91 participated in only one program
• 20 participated in 2 programs
• 17 (major) publishers are in 3 or more programs
• Lots of redundancy for STM
• Other disciplines, smaller publishers, non-Roman,
and dynamic Web publications are less well
represented and less likely to have an
archiving/preservation program
15. “Minimal” set of services?
• This area of the report:
• Is the most lengthy
• Is particularly clearly written
• Represents the area that we know least about
(much technical activity with yet a long way to
go to assure perpetual availability)
• Identifies emerging best practices and standards
• Some areas covered: formats for ingestion, what
content is included, how to know it's all there, is it
corrupted, cost effectiveness, data migration vs.
emulation, guard against loss/backup, etc.
16. Organizational viability?
• Most of the 12 appear to have the necessary
organizational structure including:
• Commitment
• Documentation
• Adherence to standards
• Succession planning
• Good business planning, models
• Incoming revenue for support
• However, mostly a limited track record (very new)
17. Part of a network?
• Networks can be formal or informal and provide:
• Idea exchange
• Sharing of documents
• Sharing software
• Coordinating content selection
• Reciprocal storage, mirroring
• Backup if other archives fail
• Shared resources, facilities
• Some of these initiatives are communicating
productively with one or more other initiatives
18. Conclusions of the CLIR study
• Trigger events will happen
• Libraries cannot do this alone
• Current license terms for libraries are mostly inadequate
(perpetual access does not equal preservation)
• Viable options are emerging
• No single archiving program will meet all needs
• Coverage is uneven
• Much content is at risk
• Libraries can and should influence developments
• Legislation needed -- legal deposit
• All programs need greater support, transparency, etc.
19. Digital Repository Certification
Research Library Group and National
Archives and Records Administration
Digital Repository Certification Task
Force
Trustworthy Repositories Audit & Certification
(TRAC): Criteria and Checklist (Version 1.0
February 2007)
Center for Research Libraries (CRL) taking
on audit and certification tasks in the US
using TRAC criteria and checklist
20. Copyright and Digital Preservation
• Section 108 Study Group Report (March
2008)
• Clarify library and museum rights to preserve
digital content.
22. Medical Library >> tomorrow
• Pilot study of online
journal archiving
• Reviewed the library’s
“core” journals for
inclusion in LOCKSS
and/or Portico
• Lack of title lists and
ISSNs problematic
• Yale University Library
study to come
23. Conclusions
• Online journals are the version of record
• Preservation issues are complex
• Technical
• Risks
• Costs
• Trust
• Submit scholarly published content to trusted
(certified) third-party preservation archives
• Use both LOCKSS and Portico.
24. Readings
• E-Journal Archiving Metes and Bounds: A Survey of the
Landscape. (September 2006)
• Urgent Action Needed to Preserve Scholarly Electronic
Journals. (October 15, 2005)
• Section 108 Study Group Report. Executive Summary
(March 2008)
Trustworthy Repositories Audit & Certification: Criteria
and Checklist. (Version 1.0 February 2007)
• Bernard F. Reilly, Jr. “Center for Research Libraries’
Auditing and Certification of Digital Archives.”
Charleston Advisor (January 2008): 59-60.
• Bernard F. Reilly, Jr. “Summary of the Test Audits of
Portico and LOCKSS.” Charleston Advisor (January
2008): 61-62.
Editor's Notes
Good afternoon. I will start with some background on how the Yale Medical Library has responded to the raise of electronic resources, implications of that in how we acquire and maintain access to content, and then will look at some key documents concerning preservation. NEXT SLIDE
Harvey Cushing & John Hay Whitney Medical Library CWML (a wing of the Sterling Hall of Medicine at Yale School of Medicine) 460,000 volumes 2.4 million dollar collection budget We serve: Yale-New Haven Medical Center Yale Schools of Medicine, Nursing, Public Health and a teaching hospital: Yale-New Haven Hospital Also, we are part of the Yale University Library with 600 FTE, 20+ locations and 11 million or so items; sharing ILS and other systems.
Morse (Periodical) Reading Room Fall 2003 an extensive usage study found that just over half of current print journals housed in this room received no detectable use. At the same time these journals were receiving significant usage online. Our patrons had moved on and we needed to keep up. After a consultants report, we completely reorganized to more effectively manage our online collections, and stopped receiving and/or keeping print journals accept for a “core” list of 240 journals.
Quote from 3 page statement issued in October 2005 after a meeting convened by the Andrew Mellon Foundation with academic administrators and librarians. Or, to put it another way: In an age of information abundance and rapid growth, an age of immensely ambitious digital resources, libraries neither own – nor have much assurance of long-time access to – all this glorious electronic content that we are making available and delivering to our patrons.
I recommend reading the CLIR study, its 120 pages, but you could stop at the end of the executive summary on page 3.
Government mandated/funded (6): KB - e-Depot (Dutch national deposit library). Started in 2000. 12 major publishers Dutch Publishers Association, IBM Kopal - DDB (National Library of Germany & Ministry of Education & Research's project to accept journals under legal deposit arrangement). Started in 2004 GNL, Gottingen, IBM, and others CISTI - Csi (Canada's national science library; Canada's scientific infostructure. Started in 2003.
LOCKSS Alliance (Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe). Started in 2000. Over 200 participating institutions in 20+ countries. Informal and “unregulated” CLOCKSS (Controlled LOCKSS). Started in 2006. 7 libraries and 11 publishers to establish a comprehensive dark archive. Intentional and comprehensive OCLC-ECO: Started in 1997. Over 5,000 titles from 70 publishers; libraries can select their content Portico: Membership-based 3rd party "dark archive" service, includes 39? publishers, thousands of titles (2006) Consortial implementations, providing access for library members (2): OhioLink Electronic Journal Center: over 7,200 journals, 9.1M articles, from 100+ publishers, 85+ members. Started early 90s? Ontario Scholars Portal: serves 20+ university libraries in Ontario; 7,300 journals
The study group developed a list of seven indicators of a e-journal archives viability. But these indicators have relevance for any trusted archiving program.
Content issues discovered by the study team in looking at these 12 initiatives.
Two years old by gives you a sense of where we are.
An important theme from the CLIR study is “Trust.” Do libraries trust publishers to maintain perpetual access and preserve that digital content. Do we trust other libraries. So we need “trusted” third-party archives that have gone through a widely accepted audit and certification process. These leads to the other important report to skim. (Its only 88 pages.) CRL “Auditing and certification of digital archives project conducted test audits using the criteria and provided feedback to the development of the document.” TRAC document CRL “Certification of Digital Archives Project” Testing RLG-NARA metrics through actual audits…project staff will determine the optimum set of methodologies for auditing and certification, and corresponding cost. It will develop and deliver specifications for the auditing and certification processes, and will outline a business model for the certifying agency or entity best suited to carry out those processes on a continuing basis.
Read 14 page executive summary. We can create preservation copies of online content. Its not legal deposit as proposed by CLIR study (that study things its useful but not a silver bullet). But its part an important step in this area.
Coming back to the Yale Medical Library, across the rotunda from the Morse Reading Room, is the Medical Historical Library. The historical library houses one of the world’s finest historical medical collections. The collection contains over 130,000 books, bound manuscripts, journals and pamphlets. This includes 325 incunabula, which are books printed between 1450 and 1500, a wonderful Renaissance, Arabic and Persian manuscript collection along with hundreds of bound manuscripts form the 16th to the 20th centuries. The Cushing/Whitney Historical Library also houses the Fry Collection of Prints and Drawings that spans five centuries, an additional 2500 portrait engravings and over 2000 original photographs. We have an artifact collection that includes over 1,000 medical and scientific instruments and the Streeter Collection of Weights and Measures containing several thousands items. The Preservation Librarian for the Cushing/Whitney Medical Library began in August 2005 to establish a program that will preserve and conserve these collections. The exhibit, which will be on view from March 14th-June 11th , illustrates issues of preservation and solutions that can be achieved to safeguard this priceless collection.
Yale is in the mist of a capital campaign (we still trail Harvard by a few billion…). Medical Library component “Medical Library>>tomorrow “Preserve Our Past” | Collection Preservation, Conservation Lab and Digitization Project for Historical Collections. We know, especially in the printed world that preservation is expense… we don’t expect that to change in the online environment. Approximately 54% were identified in one or both of these archives. LOCKSS does not have a list, needed to look at participating publisher lists. Portico list was missing ISSNs.