pecan phase 2: pilot for ensuring continuity of access via nesli2

PECAN Phase 2Pilot for Ensuring Continuity of Access via Nesli2

Adam Rusbridge

EDINA, University of Edinburgh

Workshops with Libraries

12th March 2012 :: JISC Collections, London

19th March 2012 :: EDINA, Edinburgh

EDINA Proposal

• Develop a prototype entitlement registry • Match up title information with institutional subscriptions and post-cancellation

entitlement

• Key components were to:

• Design and implement a demonstrator Entitlement Registry • Supporting initial ingest and display of data

• Assess methods to automate data ingest

• Assess methods to maintain accuracy of records over time

• Understand information requirements • For recording, maintaining, providing access

• UK HE community

• NESLi2 publishers

Initial Data Model

• Package (collection) as central component

• Flexible institutional identifiers

• Record institutional relationships (record license transfer info)

• Capture ‘verification statement’

• Capture publisher transfers over time

Data Supply

• Taylor and Francis:

• SAGE:

Data Sources: Handling dynamic information

• Two related content requirements

• 1. Record of Entitlement • Messy as an institution can change titles part-way through a deal

(keeping the same cost value)

• Messy as publishers transfer titles, and entitlements, to other publishers

• 2. Current information about a deal• Messy as titles move in and out of a deal

• How do we capture this dynamic information?

Data Sources: Handling dynamic information

1. Duplicate coverage: is it useful to identify reasons for this?• Different subscriptions, purchasing departments

• How do we usefully distinguish purchases and purchasing authorities

1. How important is the ‘package’?• Neither publisher provided us with this, although we did request it

• How to define and maintain information on package/collection?• Journal A-Z lists are a good source of information

• But don’t seem to be updated regularly?

• Recording publisher transfers• Source information through the TRANSFER initiative

3. Purchasing authority: understanding account numbers

Data Formats

• Spreadsheets are satisfactory for development purposes, but do not scale

• A-Z title lists are a suitable source for title information• Effort to ingest every time: standard formats or a central source like the ISSN

Register would assist

• Service- level needs a standard format• ONIX for Serials: SOH (Serials Online Holdings)• ONIX for Serials: SPS (Serials Products and Subscriptions)• KBART..?

• However, need better publisher support before expecting them to undertake developments.

Demo

• http://pecandev.edina.ac.uk:8080• Jane Librarian / passw0rd• Bill Books / passw0rd

Demo

Conclusions so far…

• Publishers manually intervened to generate information• We need to specify and agree data field & formats• Negotiate supply of this, with sensible timings

• Standards will be useful• ONIX family show promise• Longer-term prospect: negotiation needed for publisher support

• To get publisher buy-in, we need new workflows around supply of information• As part of contract, publisher delivers record of entitlement to registry

• Make this a requirement of future NESLi2 license…?

• Need service level registry first

• Goal is to minimise need for manual intervention

How can the prototype be extended?

• Prototype has limited functionality• Use entitlement registry to assist with the verification process• Draw in data from other services, e.g. Keepers Registry

• Following slides contain a selection of wire-framed ideas to highlight possibilities.

Wireframes: Verification & External Data

Wireframes: Verification Process

Wireframes: Verification Summary & Reporting

Find out more…

http://edina.ac.uk/projects/pecan2_summary.html

a.rusbridge@ed.ac.uk

@EDINA_eJournals