Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Subject Librarians’ Forum on eLD #3 5 & 11 November 2013.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Subject Librarians’ Forum on eLD #3 5 & 11 November 2013."— Presentation transcript:

1 Subject Librarians’ Forum on eLD #3 5 & 11 November 2013

2 Karine Barker, Subject Librarian for Medical Sciences Isabel Holowaty, Bodleian History Librarian (Chair) Jo Gardner, Bodleian Social Sciences Librarian Jane Rawson, Vere Harmsworth Librarian, Chair of the SOLO User Group Susan Thomas, Digital Archivist, Bodleian Electronic Archives and Manuscripts Angela Carritt, Bodleian Libraries User Education Co-Ordinator Richard Gibby, Legal Deposit Libraries Manager Alison Felstead, Head of Resource Description, C&RD Andy Mackinnon, Library Database Programming & Applications Support Team, BLDSS Michael Popham, Head, Oxford Digital Library Jackie Raw, Bodleian Head of Legal Deposit Operations (Secretary) Catríona Cannon, Bodleian Associate Director, Collection Support eLD Group: Who’s who

3 Reports to Collection Management Strategy Group (CMSG) Consults Receive information & feedback Makes recommendations Communicates eLD Group: remit

4 Develop and implement methods for consulting with subject librarians and curators on publishers’ priorities and web archiving priorities locally and sharing outcomes with them and other relevant staff. Develop and implement local communication plans ; identify and liaise with relevant BodLibs committees and groups whose work might be affected by eLD (e.g. GL Reclassification WP) Draft paper on Oxford-specific requirements in order to be fully eLD- functional for local planning purposes and decide which Oxford-specific issues can be forward to LDLs to assist further development and improvements. Draft local decision-making and work-flow plans. Develop recommendations for subject librarians regarding changes to collection development policies, selection work, new book displays, user education etc. Identify user education needs and develop plans for reader services staff and subject librarians. Led by SOLO UG, review display of eLD material in SOLO. eLD Group: objectives

5 Updating stakeholders: MT: Subject Librarians’ Forum, intranet pages, web archive launch update to BodLibs Round Table update to Divisional CLiPS & CUL Making eLD work in Oxford: Identify Requirements to be eLD functional: access & use, information retrieval, collection development Active participation at Legal Deposit Libraries levels re publishers priorities, format priorities, ebook ingest workflows, metadata, Notice and Takedown, printing, etc. eLD Group: current work

6 Making eLD work in Oxford: Requirements

7

8 eLD update & publishers’ priorities

9 Update on the move to eLD to date There are over 103,000 article records for eLD material in SOLO (as of mid-October 2013) Serials- Maney, Wiley and Informa Healthcare have transitioned to e and the BL is receiving regular deposits In 2014-15 Manchester University Press, Emerald, Edinburgh University Press and Cambridge University Press have all agreed to deposit their serials via Portico. Oxford University Press and Sage will do so using the BL’s Portal in January 2014. Monographs- The BL is not yet able to process content at scale as they found that the original eBooks 1 ‘pilot’ software was not viable for live implementation. Currently they are working on eBooks 2 and Taylor and Francis will test this in due course. Collecting content on a large scale is not expected until mid- 2014. T&F and Palgrave Macmillan are still very keen to move to e deposit but ingest is delayed as is the move for other major academic publishers until high-level requirements are addressed. Kogan Page and Woodhead/Chandos are depositing under eLD. Hachette has deposited content with the BL but this is not yet accessible on SOLO. They continue to publish some books in print and the Agent will continue to claim these.

10 1. The LDLs: publisher priorities matrix

11 Publisher priorities. Conflict resolution* The objective is to reach consensus between partners. If this cannot be agreed a process to resolve the disagreement will be invoked. When a publisher approaches the BL Andy Davis will apply the matrix. If the result is green a publisher can be added to the priority list for migration in due course. Any other outcome = red. Red requires consultation. If the vote is 6:0 or 5:1 a publisher can be added to the priority list for migration in due course and Andy will inform the agency and all LDLs. If the vote is 3:3 the publisher will be informed that they cannot start to migrate before late 2014 or 2015 at the earliest because of capability and resourcing capacity constraints. If the vote is 4:2 the publisher will be discussed at CDAS. Factors influencing the discussion will be number of titles affected and cost of substitution, ratio of titles to be deposited digitally to titles currently deposited in print, publisher’s level of enthusiasm to deposit digitally and the potential risk if we delay. *IG paper 239.

12 Publisher priorities. Conflict resolution* Example: For the original 25 publishers Category 1. No disagreement – prioritise for early migration when end-to-end capabilities and resources allow eg Kogan Page, Dorling Kindersley Category 2. T&F and Palgrave Macmillan are exceptional cases – very hard pressure. We will work with them in testing capabilities and a agree a timetable on completion Category 3. Academic publishers we do not wish to prioritise. Eg OUP, CUP and Sage. We will not start migrating them before late 2014 at the earliest. *IG paper 239.

13 Summary: end to end decision making process

14 2. Our local decision making process The matrix is not the most user-friendly tool for the large number of staff with a vote at Oxford. We propose to use a Survey Monkey poll instead and we’ll feed our findings back into the matrix and submit this with the other LDLs. You can find this at: http://www.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/staff/services/card/ldo/e-legal-deposit-information-for- staff/e-legal-deposit-information-fo-subject-specialists How to vote? Jane has considered this from a subject librarian’s perspective-

15 Survey monkey

16

17 Things to consider when responding What do they publish? – Type of content? How important/core to your collection? – Don’t forget to consider imprints! How much do they publish? How much do we get? – How quickly do books arrive? How much do you claim? What percentage of claims are successful? How much do you end up buying anyway? How do your readers use the books? – How heavily? Do you rely on print LD or purchase additional for lending/multiple copies? Would they demand print copies if the LD method switched?

18 If you don’t know the answer already… Search SOLO for each imprint as publisher – Limit to your library and sort by date-newest Review recent VBD selections / LD claims/ orders

19 A heads up. 5 year collection planning for the LDLs. Collecting by format? At a recent CDAS workshop the BL sought views from the LDLs on possible transition by format in the longer term. We began by considering collecting by - E-Journals Academic e-books Trade/ fiction e-books Other serials or monographs e.g. market research reports Freely available web pages Web content behind passwords and paywall barriers (which includes many news and magazine sites) Documents embedded within web pages e.g. official publications, conference reports Digital editions of newspapers (i.e. mobile editions) Digital editions of magazines (i.e. mobile editions) Other mobile content e.g games Databases e.g. research data Any other digital content within scope e.g. social media There may be other formats not listed here that we could add. The BL will put together a straw man for discussion at LDIG/CDAS and this will take time. It may be that ‘by format’ is not considered useful as it cuts across negotiations with publishers and may be less clear cut to us in terms of content type. However, it should prove an interesting discussion as the LDLs continue to plan for future collection under eLD. Again we will consult before taking this forward. Any questions…

20 How could eLD affect collection development work? Selection Processing Space Promotion Group work (20mins)

21 All eLD Group members have provided a list Priorities will be discussed 11 November (PM) Four main areas: 1. Printing 2. SOLO searching & display 3. Access (via tablets) 4. Improve performance of ERICOM Update: Requirements

22 Cannot open agreed firewall port – security contravention Plan B: VPN tunnel for communicating between servers PCAS will be integrated Awaiting confirmation Requirements: Printing

23 Distinguish eLD from non-eLD content Weight non-eLD content Ability to find eLD content by journal and monograph title Find eLD journals that were first received as LD journals Requirements: SOLO searching & display

24 Risk: eLD material will be seen as inferior and a step backwards in provision Business Case proposed to British Library for project to examine access from tablets. If accepted, would run Jan 2014 – March 2015 Aims to find tactical solution LDLs decide whether to adopt solution Requirements: Access via tablets

25 Currently slow Would ideally function like a subscription resource: – Browsing – Navigation – Clickable TOCs and references – Export options Accessibility for disabled users Requirements: Improve ERICOM performance

26 Update: Legal Deposit Web Archive

27 Scope of the Legal Deposit UK Web Archive Domain Crawl (broad sweep of UK web) Domain Crawl (broad sweep of UK web) Special Collections (themes/events) Special Collections (themes/events) Key sites (news; high impact/value) Key sites (news; high impact/value) Rapid response (current events) Rapid response (current events)

28 Timeline: domain crawl Aug-Dec 2012: Pre-regulation experimenting with a full domain dark crawl Apr-Jun 2013: First post-regulation full domain crawl captures over 31TB of data/~3.8 million websites ?2 Dec 2013 – launch of the first domain crawl Broad, but shallow, coverage of UK webspace Caps may result in incomplete captures for some sites

29 First ‘Special Collection’ On NHS Reform Collected 2.9TB to from Apr to Jun 2013 List of websites supplied by BL curators 16 Oct 2013: discoverable in BL catalogue and in use in BL reading rooms 23 Oct 2013: Green light to make LDWA Search Tool available at all LDLs 31 Oct 2013: LDWA Search Tool listed in OxLIP+

30 Special Collections for 2014 Up to five for 2014 Nominations so far include: – Centenary of the outbreak of WW1 (28 Jul 2014) – British coverage and participation in the Winter Olympics (Feb 2014) – Commonwealth Games (Jul-Aug 2014) – Referendum on Scottish independence (18 Sep 2014)

31 List of ‘key sites’ 250-500 ‘key sites’ For ‘better’ archiving National Libraries and TCD have provided input to the list of ‘key sites’ We expect to provide input soon First iteration of ‘key sites’ list in use, July 2013 Includes core news sites (local and national) Example key sitesArchiving frequency http://www.wildlife-sound.org Annually http://www.wru.co.uk/ Quarterly http://www.visitscotland.com Six-monthly http://www.vam.ac.uk Quarterly http://www.itv.com Weekly http://www.childrenssociety.org.uk Six-monthly

32 First ‘rapid response’ crawl On the news of the death of Mrs Thatcher Two weeks in April 2013, using pre-existing list of news sites Collected 15.4GB data

33 Consultation on priorities Legal Deposit Web Archive Prioritisation Group (LDWAPG) – To instigate and then oversee the canvassing of proposals for focussed collections and to adjudicate between them. – To review the key sites (inc. news lists) – To approve rapid web archiving activity in response to an emerging event. – To support the BL Web Archiving Team in initiating and maintaining the most appropriate contacts with content specialists across the LDLs. Susan Thomas is our LDWAPG member Input will be sought from a wide range of Bodleian staff, including archivists, curators and librarians See Intranet for more detail

34 Access to LDWA Not discoverable in SOLO. No plans to include LDWA metadata there. Our URL is https://bodleian.ldls.org.uk/ldwahttps://bodleian.ldls.org.uk/ldwa Will be listed in OxLIP+ To search metadata offsite, use British Library catalogue at http://explore.bl.uk.http://explore.bl.uk As with other eLD - access only on LDL premises.

35 Communications New Web Archive category in OxLIP+ New LibGuide Tab for Webarchives Bulletin for Outline in December Guidance on the Intranet: http://www.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/staff/services/card/ldo/e-legal-deposit- information-for-staff/legal-deposit-web-archive

36 Final Q&A?

37 Bookmark eLD pages: http://www.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/staff/services/card/ldo/e-legal-deposit-information-for-staff Respond to eLD SurveyMonkey Publicise web archive LibGuide tab OxLIP+ category General publicity once launched


Download ppt "Subject Librarians’ Forum on eLD #3 5 & 11 November 2013."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google