The KBART Recommended Practice

24
The KBART Recommended Practice Nettie Lagace (@abugseye) NISO Associate Director for Programs CEAL Workshop on Electronic Resources Standards and Best Practices March 25, 2014

description

The KBART Recommended Practice. Nettie Lagace (@ abugseye ) NISO Associate Director for Programs CEAL Workshop on Electronic Resources Standards and Best Practices March 25, 2014. OpenURL query (base URL + metadata string). repository. link resolver/ knowledge base. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript of The KBART Recommended Practice

Page 1: The KBART Recommended Practice

The KBART Recommended Practice

Nettie Lagace (@abugseye)NISO Associate Director for Programs

CEAL Workshop on Electronic Resources Standards and Best Practices

March 25, 2014

Page 2: The KBART Recommended Practice

article citation

OpenURL query (base URL

+ metadata string)

link resolver/knowledge base

target (cited)article

publisherwebsite

database

printcollections

gateways

publisher/providerholdings data

repository

OpenURL basics

Page 3: The KBART Recommended Practice

• A database• Contains information about web resources (global)– e.g. what journal holdings are available in JSTOR– and how you link to articles in them

• Contains information about the resources a library has licensed/owns (local)– May contain electronic and print holdings (in

addition to a number of other services)• Used by a link resolver to direct institutional users to

the ‘appropriate copy’

What is a KnowledgeBase?

Page 4: The KBART Recommended Practice

• It tracks the library’s content and identifies locations for the content

• It knows which versions the library is able to access

• So – it’s the only place that can get a user to the “appropriate copy” … the one that his/her library has licensed.

The KnowledgeBase’s Central Role in the Library

Page 5: The KBART Recommended Practice

• More content visible to end users• Content linking is more accurate for end users• Increase in content usage• Maximum reach for authors and editors• Better return on investment for library• Favorable renewal decision• Protection of revenue for content providers

Benefits for All

Page 6: The KBART Recommended Practice

Where the chain breaks

• Wrong data– Publisher gives wrong metadata for title to the KB– Link resolver uses bad metadata to make link– Link does not resolve to correct target– Dead end

• Outdated data– Publisher said it has a particular issue– Link resolver links to an article from it– Issue has been removed– Dead end – Or, provider doesn’t notify that issue is now live– So no traffic from link resolvers to that issue!

Page 7: The KBART Recommended Practice

KBART: A simple metadata exchange format

Page 8: The KBART Recommended Practice

Ebooks

• Challenges– Incomplete– Non-standard data– Frequency

8

Page 9: The KBART Recommended Practice

Ebooks

• Phase I – recommendations were serial-centric– Some fields were dual-purpose

• date_first_issue_online• Identifiers

– Holding’s content type was ambiguous• Phase II– 8 new monographic fields added– Disambiguation of usage

9

Page 10: The KBART Recommended Practice

10

Ebooks Serials! – Phase II

• Serials-only fields for Phase II:– date_first_issue_online– num_first_vol_online– num_first_issue_online– date_last_issue_online– num_last_vol_online– num_last_issue_online

Page 11: The KBART Recommended Practice

11

Ebooks and Serials! – Phase II

• Fields used for both monographs and serials:– Identifiers– title_id– embargo_info– coverage_depth– coverage_notes– title_url– Publication_type (Serial, Monograph)

Page 12: The KBART Recommended Practice

12

New Ebooks fields for Phase II

• date_monograph_published_print • date_monograph_published_online• monograph_volume• monograph_edition• first_editor

Page 13: The KBART Recommended Practice

13

Book Series / Proceedings - Phase II

• Challenges– Both serial and monograph– Users search for both titles

• New fields– parent_publication_title_id– preceding_publication_title_id

Page 14: The KBART Recommended Practice

14

Open Access

• OA has gotten more popular • Importance of facilitating access to both paid

and free peer-reviewed, quality publications (not just fee-based material).

Page 15: The KBART Recommended Practice

15

Open Access

• Challenges– What to do with Hybrid OA models?• Embargoed Hybrid OA – example: free access until one

year ago. • Title transfer OA – title changes from OA to paid (or

vice versa) upon transfer to another publisher. • Author-paid OA – some articles fee-based.• Full OA – all content is free

– Title-level vs. article-level OA metadata

Page 16: The KBART Recommended Practice

16

Open Access

• The decision was made not to differentiate between Free and OA for KBART.

• Needed to strike a balance between noting significant OA content and making the file understandable.

Page 17: The KBART Recommended Practice

17

Open Access

• Free-text coverage_notes field suggested to explain subtleties of OA availability for that particular title.

• New field – access_type– “F” – title is mostly fee-based

(subscription/purchase)– “OA” – 50% or more of the title is

OA/freely accessible.

Page 18: The KBART Recommended Practice

18

Consortia

• Survey results• Libraries purchase titles as a consortium• Consortium administrators and librarians need

the same title-level information from their consortium-purchased packages as they do from “vanilla” publisher packages.

• Difficult to obtain accurate consortium-specific title lists.

Page 19: The KBART Recommended Practice

19

Consortia

• We re-state the importance of providing a separate file for each “Global” package that the Content Provider offers.

• Consortium-specific files should be created when: – A unique set of titles has been packaged for the

consortium, different than the Content Provider’s standard packages.

– A package contains unique dates of coverage.

Page 20: The KBART Recommended Practice

20

Consortia• Changes to file naming for ALL files. • Addition of “Region/Consortium” value in file

structure. – [ProviderName]_[Region/Consortium]_[Package

Name]_[YYYY-MM-DD].txt– Applicable to Consortia packages and Regional variants

(e.g., “Asia-Pacific”, “Germany”, etc.)– “Global” value is used if the package

is available for all libraries to purchase.

Page 21: The KBART Recommended Practice

21

Consortia – New File Name Examples

• Title list is not region or consortium-specific, includes all titles from the content provider: – JSTOR_Global_AllTitles_2008-12-01.txt – Taylor & Francis_Global_AllTitles_2012-08-30

• Title list is consortium-specific, for a specific package:– IOP_NESLi2_Option 1 (2011)_2012-05-31.txt (includes a year as part of the

package name)– Oxford_SCELC_AllTitles_2012-01-09.txt (contains all titles that the consortium

has subscribed to)

• Title list is region-specific, for a specific package:– Springer_Asia-Pacific_Medicine_2012-08-03.txt

Page 22: The KBART Recommended Practice

Phase 1 – Universally accepted standardized publisher metadata, regularly distributed AND available on demand

Phase 2 – Broad adoption, Consortia, More content type coverage (eBooks, conference proceedings), Open Access materials– Final document now in last stage of NISO approval before publication

Phase 3? – Even more content types, automated delivery, institutional metadata????

KBART’s lifespan

Page 23: The KBART Recommended Practice

1. Everything can be found at http://www.uksg.org/kbart/endorsement

2. Review the requirements (data samples available)3. Format your title lists accordingly.4. Self-check to ensure they conform to the recommended

practice5. Ensure that you have a process in place for regular data

updates6. Register your organization on the KBART registry website:

http://bit.ly/kbartregistry

Publisher Involvement

Page 24: The KBART Recommended Practice

Thank you! [email protected]

@abugseye

Spring Colors! by cerebros1 is licensed under CC-BY 2.0