NISO Update ODI June 2014 Morse
•
0 gostou•936 visualizações
The NISO Update provides the latest news about NISO's current efforts, including standards, recommended practices and community meetings covering many areas of interest to the library community. Working group members will provide updates on projects newly underway or recently completed. Open Discovery Initiative (ODI), Laura Morse, Director, Library Systems, Harvard University
Recomendados
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Mais procurados
Mais procurados (20)
Destaque
Destaque (8)
Semelhante a NISO Update ODI June 2014 Morse
Semelhante a NISO Update ODI June 2014 Morse (20)
Mais de National Information Standards Organization (NISO)
Mais de National Information Standards Organization (NISO) (20)
Último
Último (20)
NISO Update ODI June 2014 Morse
- 1. ODI - Open Discovery Initiative Laura Morse ALA Annual NISO Update – June 29, 2014
- 2. The context for ODI • Based on a meeting at ALA Annual Conference in New Orleans on Sunday June 26, 2011. Recognition of the following trends and issues: – Emergence of Library Discovery Services solutions • Based on index of a wide range of content • Commercial and open access • Primary journal literature, ebooks, and more – Adopted by thousands of libraries around the world, and impact millions of users – Agreements between content providers and discovery providers ad-hoc, not representative of all content, and opaque to customers. 2
- 3. General Goals • Define ways for libraries to assess the level of content providers’ participation in discovery services • Help streamline the process by which content providers work with discovery service vendors • Define models for “fair” linking from discovery services to publishers’ content • Determine what usage statistics should be collected for libraries and for content providers 3
- 4. Balance of Constituents Libraries Publishers Service Providers 4 Marshall Breeding, Independent Consultant Jamene Brooks-Kieffer, Kansas State University Laura Morse, Harvard University Ken Varnum, University of Michigan Sara Brownmiller, University of Oregon Lucy Harrison, Florida Virtual Campus (D2D liaison/observer) Michele Newberry, Independent Lettie Conrad, SAGE Publications Jeff Lang, Thomson Reuters Linda Beebe, American Psychological Assoc Aaron Wood, Alexander Street Press Roger Schonfeld, JSTOR, Ithaka Jenny Walker, Independent Consultant John Law, Proquest Michael Gorrell, EBSCO Information Services David Lindahl, University of Rochester (XC) Jeff Penka, OCLC (D2D liaison/observer)
- 5. Recommended Practice • Open Discovery Initiative: Promoting Transparency in Discovery (NISO RP-19-2014) - June 26th, 2014 – Vocabulary – NISO Recommended Practice – Mechanisms to evaluate conformance with recommended practice 5
- 6. Vocabulary 1.2 Terms and Definitions – Key areas – Search Models and Related Concepts – Data Definitions – Methods of Data Exchange – Actors – License Terms 6
- 7. Vocabulary (Examples) • central index - The result of storing and indexing content in a central location. Disparate content sources are aggregated with consistent formatting, indexing, and ranking algorithms. Also referred to as centrally indexed search engine. • enhanced metadata Metadata that is augmented by textual descriptions extracted directly from the work including some or all of abstracts, tables of contents, and sample pages • syndication -Method of pushing content to remote indexing, abstracting, or display services. • content provider - The organization providing dissemination of the content (literature or information). May be a publisher, aggregator, OA or institutional repository, or A&I service provider. The same content may be available from multiple content providers. • market product - A specific, defined collection of resources made available for license or use by a content provider to a library. This could be a citation database, a set of e-journals or e-books, or other constellation of titles or objects commonly licensed as a single entity. 7
- 8. Recommended Practices 3.1 General • Oversight Group – education, promotion, ongoing discussion • Conformance Disclosure – via checklists included in the best practice 8
- 9. Recommended Practices 3.2 Content Providers • Participation – provide core metadata and full-text/original content, as well as full text and enriched content • Core metadata elements – basic citation metadata (author, title, publisher, date, type, format, etc) • Enriched content – indexing data (A&I data like subject headings), full text or transcript, abstracts/description • Disclosure – provide information to libraries related to level of participation • Technical formats – use existing standards to facilitate data exchange 9
- 10. Recommended Practices 3.3 Discovery Service Providers • Disclosure – provide key information in a consistent, usable form to libraries about content indexed to facilitate evaluation • Linking – linking and relevancy methods should not introduce bias to particular content providers; libraries should determine linking choices; annual disclosure related to neutrality • Data transfer – use existing protocols and provide documentation, preferences, and indication on impact on different processes to content providers 10
- 11. Recommended Practices 3.4 Usage Statistics Provide simple and frequent statistics to content providers – Total number of searches – Result clicks – Total number of click-throughs Provide simple and frequent statistics to libraries – Total number of searches per month – Total number of unique visitors per month – Total number of click-throughs per month – Top 500 search queries for the last period – Top 100 referring URLs to the discovery service for the last period 11
- 12. Next Steps • Collaborative Discussion • Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) • Managing “Restricted” Content in Discovery Services • Reporting on Discovery Service Content at a Collection Level • On-Demand Lookup by Discovery Service Users • Research and Analysis to Monitor Discovery Services for Fair/Unbiased Linking • Further Interaction with COUNTER • Identification of Features/Functionality of Discovery Services to Address Needs of A&I Service Providers 12
- 13. Conformance Disclosure Content Provider Conformance Checklist – Appendix B 13
- 14. Conformance Disclosure Discovery Provider Conformance Checklist – Appendix C 14
- 15. Summary Web-scale discovery systems are increasingly important to the work of libraries in service of their users. Fall 2013 Harvard Library User Survey • 434 undergraduates, graduate students, faculty, staff, and other non- Harvard researchers across all disciplines. 297 (68%) ranked single search as important. . 15
- 16. Summary “One form, one search, one syntax.” – faculty member survey respondent Content Providers & Discovery System Providers, please follow these best practices to ensure that your data and services are available to meet the needs of customers and users. Libraries, please engage in conversations with content providers and discovery system providers early and often to ensure that discovery systems best serve our users now and in the future. Please use the conformance checklists with all types of content providers and discovery vendors to inform your decision making. 16
- 17. Summary Please read the full recommended practice, available in the ODI Workroom: http://www.niso.org/workrooms/odi/ 17
Notas do Editor
- In order to ensure consistent use of terminology, one of the early tasks of ODI was to create a glossary of definitions relevant to the field of investigation. The terms as used in this recommended practice, have the meanings indicated below.
- Create an oversight group (Standing Committee or Working Group) to promote educational opportunities about adoption of these recommended practices, provide support for content providers and discovery providers during adoption, provide a forum for ongoing discussion related to all aspects of discovery platforms for all stakeholders (content providers, discovery providers, libraries), and determine timing for next steps for ongoing work. 2. Content providers and discovery service providers can take specific measures to assert their conformance with the recommended practices of the ODI. These measures will be voluntarily made by the organizations. Self-check conformance lists are provided in Appendix B and Appendix C. In this phase, conformance will not be assessed by NISO or any other formal organization, but through general community review
- ODI recommends that discovery services implement the following protocols to ensure fair linking: 1. Discovery services should not discriminate, based on business relationships, among content providers or products (especially their own) in the methods that are used to generate results, relevance rankings, or link order. 2. In cases where the same content is available through multiple content platforms (such as a primary publisher and a secondary database, or multiple secondary databases), discovery service providers should provide mechanisms to enable libraries implementing the service to establish preferences regarding which platforms to present to users as link targets, and in what order or priority. 3. Discovery service providers should issue a statement annually to all customers (or generically on their website in an area available to all customers) explaining their business connections with content providers, including those with direct or indirect ownership relationships and those with which they have negotiated paid or other agreements for metadata deposit, direct linking, or other special arrangements. 4. Discovery service providers should offer an affirmative statement of the neutrality of their algorithms for generating result sets, relevance rankings, and link order with respect to ideological/political viewpoint, content provider source (especially but not limited to any content that it or its parent organization may provide), and any other relevant factors. 5. Discovery service providers should make other aspects of link presentation associated with a given result (including the number of links presented, the order in which links are presented within a given result, and how libraries’ “get the full text” link is labeled / branded) configurable options by libraries. 6. Discovery service providers should offer a seamless link (not necessarily a full-text link) from the discovery screen(s) to the A&I interface(s) utilized in the discovery service index, when such link can be provided by the A&I provider. NISO RP-19-2014, Open Discovery Initiative 26 7. Discovery service providers should supply content providers and libraries with information when material changes are made to the discovery service that could impact the result set or relevance rankings or link order of results.
- When requested by libraries, Content Providers can use the table to indicate their ODI compliance. A ‘Y’ (for Yes) in column 1 indicates compliance with the indicated paragraph of this Recommended Practice. A ‘P’ response indicates Partial compliance for which explanatory comments should be entered in the last column. An ‘N’ (No) response indicates that the content provider does not comply with the recommendation. Explanatory comments may be added for any response.
- When requested by libraries, Discovery Service Providers can use the table below to indicate their ODI compliance. A ‘Y’ (for Yes) in column 1 indicates compliance with the indicated paragraph of this Recommended Practice. A ‘P’ response indicates Partial compliance for which explanatory comments should be entered in the last column. An ‘N’ (No) response indicates that the content provider does not comply with the recommendation. Explanatory comments may be added for any response.
- In a open response to an open ended question in a Fall 2013 survey “What ONE change to library search tools (HOLLIS, HOLLIS Classic, E-Research@Harvard, and the Harvard Library web site) would have the biggest impact on your research?”, 46 users from a mix of disciplines and roles responded with single search across all materials.
- In a open response to an open ended question in a Fall 2013 survey “What ONE change to library search tools (HOLLIS, HOLLIS Classic, E-Research@Harvard, and the Harvard Library web site) would have the biggest impact on your research?”, 46 users from a mix of disciplines and roles responded with single search across all materials.