1. Link Resolvers and Knowledge Bases – Why are they so important? Sarah Pearson University of Birmingham Co-Chair KBART Working Group

2. Agenda  What is OpenURL technology?  Why are knowledge bases important?  Problems with knowledge base metadata  How to make content more visible to users  The role of KBART  Feedback from you!

3. institution     repository publisher website database print collections gateways article citation article title = … first author = … journal name = … article title = … first author = … journal name = … metadata string OpenURL query (base URL + metadata string) resolver.institution.edu base URL of link resolver link resolver’s knowledge base publisher/provider holdings data library holdings data content licence  target (cited) article predictable link

4. OpenURL query (base URL + metadata string)  Make their content OpenURL compliant by: –Creating outbound OpenURL links  Make their content “KB compliant” by: –Telling the knowledge base what content they have and how to link to it Which bits do publishers do? publisher/provider holdings data link resolver’s knowledge base  Together: “link-resolver compliance”

5. What does the link resolver do?  Takes an OpenURL and extracts the article metadata –http://baseurl.institution.edu/content?genre=article&issn= 1234-5679&volume=53&issue=3&page=14  Compares article metadata to knowledge base –where is the article available? –which version is preferred by the library?  Puts together a predictable link to this version target (cited) article predictable link –http://baseurl.institution.edu/content?genre=article&issn= 1234-5679&volume=53&issue=3&page=14

6. What bits do libraries do?  Have a link resolver! And register it with providers  Customise its knowledge base with their own holdings data institution resolver.institution.edu base URL of link resolver library holdings data link resolver’s knowledge base

7. Link resolver services Link Resolver Services

8. 2 full text targets

9. Full text article

10. What is a knowledge base?  A database  Contains information about web resources –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 –May contain electronic and print holdings (in addition to a number of other services)

11. So why is it so important?  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 an “appropriate copy”

12. And that means?......  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

13. Knowledge Bases – Measure of Success  Better access for users –Fewer false positives: saying it’s available when its not –Fewer false negatives: saying it’s not available when it is  Best-case scenario: –IF a user is seeking an item, and the library offers access to it through exactly 3 online resources, –THEN the OpenURL resolver returns exactly 3 accurate links to the full text –AND the ‘best’ resources appear first

14. Problems in the supply chain  Wrong data –Content provider gives wrong metadata for title to knowledge base –Link resolver uses bad metadata to make link –Link does not resolve to correct target –Dead end 

15.  Outdated data –Provider tells knowledge base 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! Problems in the supply chain That’s not good!

16. Problems in the supply chain  Lack of knowledge of its importance means:  some content providers aren’t using it  many others aren’t investing in more accurate & timely metadata transfer

17. And when the supply chain breaks …  Researchers will go to …

18.  Knowledge Bases And Related Tools  UKSG and NISO collaborative project  UKSG 2007 research report, “Link Resolvers and the Serials Supply Chain”Link Resolvers and the Serials Supply Chain  To improve navigation of the e-resource supply chain by  Ensuring timely transfer of accurate data to knowledge bases, ERMs etc. Right. So. What is KBart?

19. Guidelines Education Information hub What is KBart’s mission?

20. Definition of the problems  Lack of uptake of OpenURL technology  Poor metadata held in knowledge bases  Inaccurate implementation of OpenURL syntax by OpenURL sources  Poor inbound URL syntax management by OpenURL targets

21. Areas which KBART is addressing  Identifier inconsistencies  Title inconsistencies  Incorrect date coverage  Inconsistent date formatting  Inconsistencies in content coverage description  Embargo inconsistencies  Data format and exchange  Outdated holdings data  Lack of customisation

22. Recommendations  Phase I – encompasses the more fundamental recommendations from original research: –File format –Mandatory and optional fields –Common approaches for presenting data within fields –Handling of packages –Frequency of data update –Collection mechanism

23. Mandatory and optional fields  Publication title  Print-format identifier (ie, ISSN, ISBN, etc.)  Online-format identifier (ie, eISSN, eISBN, etc.)  Date of first issue available online  Number of first volume available online  Number of first issue available online  Date of last issue available online (or blank, if coverage is to present)  Number of last volume available online (or blank, if coverage is to present)  Number of last issue available online (or blank, if coverage is to present)  Title-level URL  First author (for monographs)  Title ID  Embargo  Coverage type (abstracts/fulltext)  Coverage notes  Publisher name (if not given in the file’s title)

24. Going public  Final Phase I KBart report now released! www.uksg.org/kbart http://www.niso.org/workrooms/kbart  Feedback and suggestions welcomed!  Phase II started in March

25. Phase II / Next Steps  Change of leadership and team members  Endorsement / Compliance / Engagement  Definitions for global vs local updates  Consortia-specific metadata transfer  Institution-specific metadata transfer  Review of metadata transfer for e-books  Open access material

26. Phase II Working Group  Jason PriceClaremont Colleges / California Digital Library  Elizabeth StevensonEdinburgh University  Chad HutchensUniversity of Wyoming  Sarah PearsonUniversity of Birmingham  Paul Moss OCLC  Sheri MearesEBSCO  Christine StohnEx Libris  Sherrard EwingSerials Solutions  Matthew LlewellinRoyal Society  Andreas BiedenbachSpringer  Marieke HeinsSwets  Ruth WellsTaylor & Francis  Rose RobinsonPublishing Technology

27. Let’s look at those benefits again……  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

28. Learn more  www.uksg.org/kbart www.uksg.org/kbart  http://www.niso.org/workrooms/kbart http://www.niso.org/workrooms/kbart  Sarah Pearson – KBart co-chair s.pearson.1@bham.ac.uk  KBart interest group http://www.niso.org/lists/kbart_interest/

29. Your Turn!  Comments on knowledge base engagement  Feedback on KBART recommendations to date  Suggestions for future work  Endorsement / take-up  Supply chain involvement