Laura Wilkinson Crossref
An interactive session to view and discuss how different Crossref members are doing with metadata completeness. Who fares best in terms of including abstracts, or text-mining links, or ORCID iDs? Crossref membership has extended to libraries and funders and scholars themselves, so we won’t just be looking at the “usual suspects”. We’ll also be asking for feedback and ideas for what checks to put in place for the next phase of Crossref participation reports. Drawing on findings from the Metadata 2020 initiative, we will also offer some insights into the barriers publishers and vendors face when collating and registering richer metadata, and advice for how to overcome them.
3. Today’s menu
● Metadata context
● Tour of Participation Reports
● Barriers faced by publishers and vendors...
● … and advice for how to overcome them
● Metadata 2020
● Interactive segment
● Participation Reports phase two
Let’s begin with…
4. Crossref makes research outputs easy to find, cite,
link, assess, and reuse.
We’re a not-for-profit membership organization
that exists to make scholarly communications
better.
Mission
5. Crossref metadata - research fuel
Metadata in
• Descriptive
• Administrative
• Structural
Metadata out
• manual search and APIs...
8. Tour of Participation Reports
https://www.crossref.org/members/prep
Supporting information:
https://www.crossref.org/participation/
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19. Barriers
● Element not collected
● Element not extracted
● Different metadata workflows
● Old schema version
● Resources
● Lack of vendor support
● Lack of awareness/understanding
20. Barriers - breaking them down! (1)
● Element not collected - collect it
● Element not extracted - extract it
● Workflows - rich metadata in all
● Old schema version - update
● Resources - Education Strategy
● Vendor support - Participation Reports
● Aware & understand - Participation Reports
21. Barriers - breaking them down! (2)
● Clear goals
● Community support
● No additional cost to update metadata
22.
23. ● Community group problem statements
metadata2020.org/communities/
● Projects (concluding this summer)
metadata2020.org/projects/
● metadata2020.org | @metadata2020 |
info@metadata2020.org
24. Over to you...
● Further examples of Participation
Reports
● Phase Two
○ any pain points we can address?
○ what other metadata elements
would you like to see?
25. Summary: How good is your metadata?
● Metadata context
● Tour of Participation Reports
● Barriers and advice for how to overcome them
● Metadata 2020
● What would you like to see in phase two?
support@crossref.org