Gathering Data NISO E-Resource Management Forum Denver, Colorado September 24-25, 2007 Oliver Pesch EBSCO Information Services

Overview The workflow The elements The entities Sources of the data Current and potential harvesting opportunities Standardization efforts and other initiatives

Overview The workflow The elements The entities Sources of the data Current and potential harvesting opportunities Standardization efforts and other initiatives

Product Resources Interface Location Consortium What For whom Making sure How much Trial AcquisitionLibrary License Terms Access Admin Terms Expose The Deal Support

Product Resources Interface Location Consortium What For who Making sure How much Trail AcquisitionLibrary License Terms Access Admin Terms Expose The Deal Support 315

Product Resources Interface Location Consortium Trial AcquisitionLibrary License Terms Access Admin The Deal E-Resource Library Consortium Trial Acquisition License Terms Access Administration Processing Contacts ENTITIES

Product Resources Interface Location Consortium Trial AcquisitionLibrary License Terms Access Admin The Deal E-Resource Library Consortium Trial Acquisition License Terms Access Administration Processing Contacts ENTITIES

Overview The workflow The elements The entities Sources of the data Current and potential harvesting opportunities Standardization efforts and other initiatives

Sources of data Library Publisher/Provider Agent/Jobber Consortium A-to-Z/Knowledge base supplier

Overview The workflow The elements The entities Sources of the data Current and potential harvesting opportunities Standardization efforts and other initiatives

E-Resource Entity Magnitude10s of thousands Total number of elements33 Elements only from the library4 Potential for harvesting29 Publisher/Provider29 (11) Agent28 (14) A-to-Z/Knowledge base supplier22 (20) Consortium0

Acquisition Entity MagnitudeDozens Total number of elements24 Elements only from the library13 Potential for harvesting11 Publisher/Provider11 (0) Agent11 (0*) A-to-Z/Knowledge base supplier0 Consortium4 (0) * This data is available to the ILS via EDI, just not the ERM

License Entity MagnitudeDozens Total number of elements23 Elements only from the library14 Potential for harvesting9 Publisher/Provider9 (0) Agent9 (2) A-to-Z/Knowledge base supplier0 Consortium0

Terms Defined Entity MagnitudeDozens Total number of elements71 Elements only from the library6 Potential for harvesting65 Publisher/Provider65 (0) Agent59 (2) A-to-Z/Knowledge base supplier1 (0) Consortium0

Access Entity MagnitudeDozens Total number of elements29 Elements only from the library12 Potential for harvesting17 Publisher/Provider16 (1) Agent15 (8) A-to-Z/Knowledge base supplier2 (2) Consortium0

Administration Entity MagnitudeDozens Total number of elements51 Elements only from the library23 Potential for harvesting28 Publisher/Provider26 (0) Agent24 (0) A-to-Z/Knowledge base supplier0 Consortium0

Overview The workflow The elements The entities Sources of the data Current and potential harvesting opportunities Standardization efforts and other initiatives

Usage data -COUNTER and SUSHI E-Resource information - Bibliographic -MARC records from content providers -MARC records from knowledge base vendors E-Resource information – Holdings -Spreadsheets from vendors, agents, publishers -Downloads from knowledge base vendors Spreadsheets, XML (ONIX SOH) Financial -Spreadsheets or Invoice load (EDI) from agent Access/Admin data -Reports (spreadsheets) from vendor Current Data Harvesting opportunities

Current Standards initiatives Existing COUNTER/SUSHI (usage) ONIX SPS (serials products and subscriptions) ONIX SOH (holdings) ONIX for Serials Coverage Statements ICEDIS (EDI) In development ONIX PL (License Expression Group) ERMI-2 ILS/ERM interoperability TRANSFER

COUNTER A Code of Practice for making usage statistic consistent, credible and comparable Dictates, terminology, processing of logs, formatting of reports and delivery of usage data Vendors must now undergo usage audit to be compliant Revision 3 will be released next year, focus on Consortium reports, XML and SUSHI Relevance to this discussion is consistent usage data provides hope of ERMs to offer usage consolidation Status: Released

SUSHI (NISO Z39.93) Standardized Usage Statistics Harvesting Initiative Automates harvesting of usage data using “Web 2.0” approach ERM/Usage consolidation, can automatically connect to and retrieve usage data from any content provider with a SUSHI server Advantages -Completely automates usage harvesting from compliant content providers -Saves hours upon hours of staff time Challenges -Lack of consistent identifiers (not always possible to map the given usage to the correct resource in the ERM) -Adoption Status: Released (Just approved by NISO Membership!)

ONIX SPS Serials Publications and Subscriptions Used for communicating information about subscription products Designed for communicating price catalogs Advantages -Does allow for some financial data -Allows for title lists to be included in packages Challenges -Does not accommodate price breakdown by component of a package, just the package itself Status: Draft

ICEDIS / EDI A series of formats to communicate order and activation data Latest revision expands message to include IP addresses and other components appropriate for e-resources Current format built on fixed data model Work being considered to upgrade to XML Advantages -Used by many publishers and agents and ILS systems Challenges -Lack of XML limits interoperability options Web service approach cannot be used easily (needed for real-time exchange of data) Fixed format nature makes implementation expensive Status: Released

ONIX SOH Serials Online Holdings Used for communicating holdings information about electronic resources Includes coverage, URLs, embargos, etc. Version 1.1 accommodates ONIX Coverage Statements Advantages -Excellent for transfer of holdings from one knowledge base to the next Challenges -Lack of consistent identifiers of vendors, packages and even titles limit interoperability opportunities Status: Released

TRANSFER A working group formed to address the problems caused by transfer of titles between publishers A set of guidelines for publishers to follow Ensure libraries have continuous access Considering a central repository of “transferred” titles Status: Under development

ONIX PL (License Expression Working Group) An XML schema that allows the terms of a license to be exchanged in a machine readable form Work also being performed on a license editor One goal was to allow negotiation to take place by exchanging and editing a license Advantages -Captures the terms of a license Challenges -An “ONIX” license represents the agreement and does not necessarily map to elements in the ERMI license element -Interpretation of the license still needed (An “implementation” of ONIX PL is being experimented with to communicate the ERMI interpretations”) Status: In development

SERU Shared E-Resource Understanding An alternative to a license when librarians and publishers agree a license is not necessary Documents expectations of behavior on part of publisher, libraries and their users Advantages -Simplifies the acquisition of e-resources -Eliminates delays and complications by avoiding license negotiation (and approval) Challenges -Will not fit every deal -Does not explicitly “grant” every right a library may want Status: In trial through end of 2007

ERMI-2 ILS Acquisitions and ERM Interoperability Allow for the exchange of a core set of financial data between the ERM and the ILS Facilitate collection analysis by providing data for Cost-per-Use calculations Advantages -Automate harvesting of data for collection analysis Challenges -Identifiers -Cost allocation for packages Status: Beginning stages

Summary An ERM is intended to be a single site to access all there is to know about an e-resource As such, the data needs are varied and complex DLF/ERMI data dictionary lists 315+ data elements and 25+ entities The data comes from many sources -Providers, agents, knowledge base vendors, consortia It is unlikely that one source will supply all data Some automated feeds exist today and many more are possible Standards are key to interoperability and smooth data exchange

SUSHI Thank you! Oliver Pesch