1

Context-Sensitive Linking and CrossRef Policy

Special Member MeetingDecember 4, 2001

2

The disconnect…Possible world?• All content digital

and assigned DOIs• Demand-driven,

article economy• Full text direct from

publisher• All access via

publisher IP-authentication

• Article-level navigation

The library context• Print• Subscription-based

budgets• Locally held resources • Full-text databases• Complex licensing

deals• Remote and mobile

users• No article-level records

3

APPROPRIATE COPY PROBLEM:WHICH URL?

DOI ResolverDOI

URL?

Sciencedirect.com?

Ohiolink.edu?

Utoronto.ca? LANL.gov

4

ACM

DOI (to Elsevier)

Ohio State User

ELSEVIER

Cited article OhioLink

The Problem

(or: “$25, please”)

CLICK

ARTICLECitation

5

Why CrossRef can’t solve the appropriate copy problem on its

own

• Only the library knows what it owns or has rights to – IP authentication at the publishers’ websites doesn’t account for all access

• The CrossRef resolution system can’t store or keep up-to-date every institution’s holdings, or be customized for local use

6

Current SFX customers• 50 libraries and consortia around the world• 2 global pharmaceutical companies• UK and European libraries include:

– Loughborough, UWestminster, London Business School, Royal Holloway, Czech Nat’l Library,Ghent, City of Sci. & Industry Paris, Delft Technical, etc…

• US libraries include:– Brown, Yale, Boston College, Harvard, MIT, NYU,

Caltech, LANL, UChicago, UDelaware, URochester

• Australian/Asian libraries include:– AARLIN (consortium of 40), University of Technology

Sydney, Nat’l Teachers College Taipai

7

Localized linking prototype

• Participants include IDF, CNRI, CrosssRef, Ex Libris, University of Illinois, LANL, OhioLink, Ohio State

• Article in DLIB Magazine, September 2001

8

Localized linking prototype

• User in library context clicks on a DOI link

• A cookie on user’s machine alerts DOI

proxy server to redirect this DOI to the local linking server

• Article-level metadata needed for local resolution can come from the source of the link, or from CrossRef

9

Reverse metadata look-up

• When a DOI is sent to CrossRef and metadata is returned

• Occurs dynamically when a user clicks on links

• Would be covered under $500/year library affiliate fee

10

OpenURL aware

References

DOI Proxy Server

DOI link

DOI

OpenURL

Metadata

DOI Handle ServerDOI

http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/toxsci/57.1.95

LANL LinkSeeker

(Local Service)

AppropriateLinks

OpenURL model for Alternative/Local resolution of CrossRef/DOI

11

12

13

14

Review: 2 possibilities…• Institution subscribes, so DOI link takes

user directly to the publisher’s site where user is authenticated… or to an intermediate page where other access options are presented

• Institution does not subscribe, but the DOI link takes user directly to the publisher’s site where user sees an abstract and may be offered pay-per-view– More than user might see otherwise– Appropriate for user with individual

subscription

15

Policy concerns• Local linking service should not be used

to circumvent subscriptions• No links to known copyright infringers• Branded link to publisher’s site always

prominent on SFX menu, and not couched in unapproved language

• Library should always have option to forego menu page to link directly to full-text if available

• Publishers should be able to opt-out of redirection to local linking server

16

Why we should cooperate with context-sensitive

linking services•  Local linking implementations are

happening anyway – Ex Libris has dozens of library clients

• If we don’t partner with vendors like Ex Libris, we can’t influence how library linking options are presented– Default, branded link to publisher– Cooperation in efforts to block copyright

infringement – Publisher opt-out

17

Furthermore…

• RMDLU makes all CrossRef publishers functionally OpenURL-enabled.

• By populating local linking servers with DOI links, libraries will come to recognize the DOI standard, and to demand DOIs in secondary databases and as a pre-requisite for library subscription dollars.

18

Reference Linking Survey

19

Problem: Why is DOI retrieval income well below projections?

• Secondary publishers not rushing to sign up– They expect to get DOIs in datafeeds

from publishers– They say we only address a portion of

their linking needs at the moment

• Only 30% of CrossRef publishers are creating outbound links

20

Hurdles to implementing reference linking

according to publishers…• “Size of the CrossRef

back archive”, “low matching rate”

• “Format of our online journals (PDF)”

• “SGML tagging of necessary metadata”

• “Technical implementation, not cost”

• “Cost, for small publishers”

• “The work involved”• “Authors don’t cite

correctly”• “Non-availability of

internal resources” • “We haven’t felt any

demand to link”

21

Would lowering fees make a difference?

• Yes: 10• No: 8

What if retrieval could be done on the basis of text strings?•Yes: 8

•No: 6•Maybe: 4

22

What publishers say CrossRef should do to help…

• “Continue implementation workshops” • “Provide a list of outside consultants who can help”• “CrossRef should build up a consultancy service”• “More support in interacting with CrossRef

system”• “More technical implementation detail on the web”• “A more timely response to technical questions”• “More education of end-users about the benefits of

DOI”• “Technical improvements”

23

Summary: barriers to linking on the publisher

side• Format of online journals (PDF)• Cost, for smaller publishers• Technical requirements, given

limited internal resources• Poor quality of references

submitted by authors

24

Barriers to linking on the CrossRef side

• Robustness of database, back archive

• Matching rate• Limited staff for technical support• Documentation

25

What CrossRef is already doing to help

• Ongoing data clean-up• Registering more content• New technical support staff in 2002• System re-write: better validation

process, enhanced inexact and partial matching

• Improving guidelines and query spec – XML query format in 2002

• Promoting end-user awareness

26

Going forward…

• Create a software toolkit or help publishers use an affordable commercial package, such as Xmetal, to convert to query format – distributed approach

OR• Accept text strings as input for

querying by creating a front-end conversion component to the query system – centralized approach