1. 1 KBART Phase II: The Next Step Towards Better Metadata Ben Johnson Lead Metadata Librarian, KnowledgeWorks Provider Data Acquisitions & Integration, Serials Solutions Nettie Lagace Associate Director for Programs, NISO The Charleston Conference November 9, 2012

2. article citation OpenURL query (base URL + metadata string) link resolver/ knowledge base target (cited) article publisher website database print collections gateways publisher/provider holdings data repository OpenURL basics

3. 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?

4. It knows where all the content is 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. KnowledgeBase’s Central Role in the Library

5. 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 Favourable renewal decision Protection of revenue for content providers Benefits for All

6. 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for title to the KB –Link resolver uses bad metadata to make link –Link does not resolve to correct target –Dead end  Outdated data –Publisher said it has a particular issue –Link resolver links to an article from it –Issue has been removed –Dead end  –Or, provider doesn ’ t notify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!

7. KBART: A simple metadata exchange format

8. Standards / industry organisations –UKSG and NISO Working group members (stakeholders): –Knowledge base vendors & Subscription Agents Ben Johnson, Serials Solutions Christine Stohn, Ex Libris Paul Moss, OCLC Sheri Meares, EBSCO Marieke Heins, Swets –Content Providers (Publisher & Aggregators) Matthew Llewellin, The Royal Society Gary Pollack, Cengage Learning Rose Robinson, Publishing Technology Andreas Biedenbach, Independent Ruth Wells, Taylor & Francis Julie Zhu, AIP AIP, T&F, Royal Society Publishing, Publishing Technology, Cengage Gale, Swets, Springer –Libraries & Consortia Magaly Bascones, JISC Sarah Price, University of Birmingham Louise Cole, Kingston University Chad Hutchens, University of Wyoming Jason Price, Claremont Colleges/SCELC Liz Stephenson, University of Edinburgh

9. Ebooks Challenges –Incomplete –Non-standard data –Frequency 9

10. 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 10

11. 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 11

12. 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) 12

13. New Ebooks fields for Phase II date_monograph_published_print date_monograph_published_online monograph_volume monograph_edition first_editor 13

14. 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 14

15. 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). 15

16. 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 16

17. 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. 17

18. 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. 18

19. 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. 19

20. 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. 20

21. 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. 21

22. 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 22

23. 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 –Draft now in final stages –Available for public review before the end of the year Phase 3? – Even more content types, automated delivery, institutional metadata???? KBART’s lifespan

24. 1.Everything can be found at http://www.uksg.org/kbart/endorsement 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 practice 5.Ensure that you have a process in place for regular data updates 6.Register your organization on the KBART registry website: http://bit.ly/kbartregistryhttp://bit.ly/kbartregistry Publisher Involvement

25. 25 nlagace@niso.org * @abugseye Benjamin.Johnson@SerialsSolutions.com thank you!