Posts Tagged ‘BL’

CLOCK and a summary of 2 other Discovery projects

Posted on May 17th, 2012 by Paul Stainthorp

Ed Chamberlain, who is on the CLOCK project team as a researcher, is involved in two other projects under the Discovery strand: OEM-UK and Open Bibliography 2. We’re looking for ways in which CLOCK can re-use data, code, processes and ideas from these projects (and elsewhere) – also what CLOCK could offer in return.

Notes:

  • Open Biblio project over the last few years; aim to aggregate large amounts of bibliographic data for scientific discovery.
  • Data collected from Cambridge University, the BL, PubMed and held as RDF, used to power an open catalogue called “Bibliographica“.
  • Problems around scaling the data/system led to the current JISC-funded Open Biblio 2 project (in the meantime, Cambridge and the BL had started to publish their data openly).
  • Open Biblio 2 started looking at a NoSQL approach (CouchDB, Lucene/Solr) – eventually settling on Elastic Search.
  • The approach of Open Biblio is to build bottom-up, community tools: BibServer and BibSoup (“Like Wikimedia for bib data”). Raises interesting questions about data quality in an open community-driven system.
  • Also looking at JSON as lightweight way of sharing bib data: emerging BibJSON convention for representing bibliographic record as a JSON object (Ed wrote a MARC-to-BibJSON-parser in Perl). N.B. BibJSON is not a million miles away from the JSON that Jerome spits out! There are three hack days taking place next month in London to look specifically at BibJSON.
  • Open Biblio 2 is also looking at JSON-LD (JSON for Linking Data), a ‘real’ JSON standard which does a lot of the things that RDF does.

tl;dr = use their JSON standards and BibSoup as a data source.

  • The second project, OEM-UK (Open Education Metadata UK), based at the IoE in London, is focusing on cataloguing workflows.
  • Data from the IoE’s SirsiDynix catalogue, plus EPrints is drawn into a Drupal framework; forms to create data (autopopulation of forms); “cataloguing the Drupal way”.
    • Thought from Andrew Beeken: could we replicate this approach, using WordPress custom post types to store and display structured content? Shades of the OPACPress project which Joss Winn and I proposed—but that was not funded—several years ago.
  • Some evidence that this approach is capable of speeding up the cataloguing process considerably: the more data you put in the faster it gets! Ed has some screencapture videos from OEM-UK showing workflow, including grabbing data via Zotero.

td;dr = OEM-UK are also successfully disrupting cataloguing workflows.

UKCoRR members’ meeting, University of Portsmouth, 27 Jan 2012

Posted on February 2nd, 2012 by Paul Stainthorp

Four boatsHere are some notes on the first event held for UKCoRR members this year:

As you probably know, UKCoRR is an entirely unfunded organisation which relies heavily on the time and energy of its members, and on the generosity of universities to host our meetings – on this occasion our heartfelt thanks to the University of Portsmouth Library, and particularly to Andy Barrow and (associate university librarian) Ken Dick, for very kindly putting us up and keeping us fed and coffee-ed, and for Ken’s warm welcome at the start of the meeting.

This was a very well-attended event: nearly 50 UKCoRR members and invited guests, from as far afield as Edinburgh (350+ miles away)… and a packed schedule. So packed, in fact, that we probably didn’t leave enough breathing space. We’ll build in more rest breaks and time for gossip professional networking at the next meeting!

  1. Slides from all the presentations below will shortly be made available on UKCoRR’s slideshare account, at: slideshare.net/ukcorr
  2. Some of the speakers kindly agreed to be filmed, and videos will be made available at: youtube.com/user/ukcorr

After Ken had welcomed us to Portstmouth, UKCoRR chair Gaz Johnson gave the first presentation of the day, with a science fiction gloss and a look at the possible future directions of UKCoRR. Gaz has already blogged about his talk. A few key points and questions:

  • The committee needs to consult with members, and these members’ meetings are a good way of doing that!
  • Our priorities (validated by the user survey, 2011) should be best practice exchange, lobbying, and advocacy;
  • Is our lack of a membership fee our USP? It means we’re beholden to no-one, we don’t have to serve anyone’s agenda (other than our members’), and it makes it easier to avoid conflicts of interest…
  • …but it’s worth considering what we could do differently if we were funded;
  • Should membership of UKCoRR bring with it certain responsibilities?
  • Aren’t repositories generally understaffed in the UK?

Next up, Andrew Dorward of EDINA on the UK RepositoryNet+ project to build “a socio-technical infrastructure to support repositories”. Andrew gave an overview of the original RepositoryNet project, and the ongoing aim to build shared services for repositories. Recently, the new project interviewed a range of UKCoRR members, Open Access publishers, members of ARMA, and active researchers about the repository landscape — broadly, those interviews validated the current approach to services — but Andrew noted that in repository “ecology“, there is some room for drawing together the range of services (search, deposit statistics, etc.) into fewer but more comprehensive tools. He also talked about the growth in OA publishing since the launch of PLoS in 2003: see doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1001235.t001

Last up before lunch, Marie-Therese Gramstadt from the University of the Creative Arts gave us an update on the Kultivate project, the advocacy and decision-making toolkits, and the associated Kultur II group, sharing best practice in repository design for creative and visual arts research. Asked to show hands, about half the UKCoRR delegates had arts researchers ‘at home’ – about the same number of people also expressed an interest in continuing the work of Kultur II. Some Kultivate links:

After lunch – the lightning talks!

  • Talking about a new strategic marketing project for WRAP (the University of Warwick’s repository) – Yvonne Budden explained the need to revamp the repo’s image, and how WRAP piggybacked on a wider redesign project at Warwick and used an interesting methodology from the Kay Grieves at the University of Sunderland, summarised as: (1) Match services to users (2) Transform services into benefits (3) Translate benefits into messages! Freebie materials (highlighter pens, etc.) are being used as bribes to encourage depositors to take the message of the repo back to their colleagues. A really striking new black-and-yellow colour scheme!
  • Matthew Smith from the University of So’ton, on the EPrints Shelves project. Building a tool to give users more control over how results from their repository are displayed on author profile pages, etc., by allowing people to log in and add/remove items from a ‘shelf’. Those ‘shelves’ can then be exported using normal EPrints export tools. Shelves should be released to the EPrints Bazaar soon. Lots of interest in the room about this plugin!
  • Tracey Kent on the use of a “request a copy” for e-theses at the University of Birmingham. Birmingham offer four options for access to e-theses: from [1] “full OA” through to [2] “request a copy” (with theses available through EThOS), [3] a more limited request (excerpts only; not on EThOS), and finally [4] fully-embargoed theses. They went from around 2,500 thesis requests per year to more than 250,000 requests/yr., with ~88% on some kind of Open Access (options [1] or [2]).
  • Margaret Feetham of Southampton Solent University talked about running their mixed-economy repository (research, student work, university publications) …with (very familiar to UKCoRR members!) little budget and few staff. SSU practice unmediated deposit, with academics given training on  copyright and licensing issues. Margaret explained how they’ve still managed to get an impressive deposit rate by engaging keen users and advocates, and by working with the university’s research services – with REF2014 as an attention-focuser!
  • From the STFC (Science and Technology Facilities Council), Catherine Jones explained how they are using CrossRef to create large numbers of (metadata-only) records in epubs.stfc.ac.uk – scientific authors like the ability to use that repository’s quick & easy DOI import tool to deposit records, but are now pressing to be able to speed the process up even further. Challenges of recording articles with hundreds or even thousands of collaborators – not uncommon in some areas of physics!

A quick breather, then straight on to the first of two invited speakers to wind the day up:

Sarah Gould of the British Library on some of the changes in the pipeline for the EThOS service. There’s general recognition that some of the features of EThOS (e.g. the “checkout” process for supplying PDF copies of theses) are a bit old hat, and too rooted in old document supply processes. The limited metadata applied to many items in EThOS is also a barrier. EThOS are engaging a new development to drag the service kicking and screaming into the 21st century, and are also engaging on a big programme (working with the BL’s library systems vendors as well as with panels of librarians) to improve the quality and range of metadata. There was an interesting discussion at this point about the possibility of EThOS linking to copies of theses in institutional repositories, rather than/as well as holding digitised copies – what might that mean for the responsibilities of the BL and institutions to ensure preservation of access?

Bravely accepting the final slot of the day, Phil Barker of JISC CETIS on the world of Open Educational Resources (OERs). Another show of hands: fewer than 25% of UKCoRR members in the room have involvement with OERs (either through projects, or through working institutional OER repos). That’s not too much of a surprise: the issues involved in storing and managing repositories of OERs can be much more complex (multiple complex objects, quality control, metadata requirements, copyright and licensed re-use, the sheer number of people involved!) and many institutions have shyed away.

Phil talked about some of the motivators for universities to engage with OER, including the morals obligation of the university (“…charter to widen knowledge”), the role of OERs in marketing universities / acting as a shop window / leading to student recruitment, and the hope that the rigorous approach needed in creating of OERs will provide a beneficial ‘trickle down’ effect into the design and management of all educational materials. Some food-for-though OER links:

As always, there was a breathtaking amount of ‘stuff’ for us to get stuck into — useful advice, supportive discussions, and news of exciting work going on — and the recognised benefit of UKCoRR members’ meetings as being a refreshingly practical, non-threatening and safe place for repository staff to talk to people faced with the same problems every day. Keep your eyes peeled for the next couple of UKCoRR events planned for this year: looks like 2012′s going to be one of our busiest yet.

OAPEN-UK focus group at the British Library

Posted on November 21st, 2011 by Paul Stainthorp

British Library staff & contractors' entrance

Today I was at the British Library (allowed in via the staff entrance, no less) for a librarians’–repository managers’ focus group of the JISC/AHRC-funded OAPEN-UK project, which will run to 2015 and which aims to gather “evidence to help stakeholders make informed decisions on the future of open access scholarly monograph publishing in the humanities and social sciences”.

N.B. There doesn’t seem to be a nice, standard abbreviation for ‘open access scholarly monograph publishing’, so to avoid endlessly repeating the phrase I’ll refer to them as ‘OA e-books’ from now on. Today’s focus group was made up of academic library people (from cataloguing, e-resource management, and subject liaison roles) along with HEI repository managers.

OAPEN-UK is an extension of the original Open Access Publishing in European Networks (OAPEN) project which looked at the role of OA scholarly monograph publishing and its potential effect on researcher attitudes, behaviours, business/publishing models – mainly in the Netherlands. Five publishers (a mixture of ‘pure’ commercial and university publishing houses) are on board the OAPEN-UK steering group; between them they have contributed 60 book titles which will form a pilot data study: divided into 30 matching ‘pairs’ of titles (each pair sharing common characteristics), one book in each pair will form the control group (licensed for sale as usual), the other in each pair will be:

“…made available on the OAPEN Library in open access under a creative commons licence. In addition, the titles may be placed / discoverable via the publisher’s own website, institutional repositories, authors own website and will be 100% available in Google Book Search. MARC records will be made available to libraries”

Quantitative and qualitative data—sales, usage, citations, reuse, plagiarism—will be gathered on both groups of 30 (control/experimental), and combined with information from focus groups (including this one!) and user surveys to inform recommendations for future directions in OA e-book provision: aimed at publishers, universities, libraries, and researcher-authors and researcher-readers.

OAPEN-UK header image

The bulk of today’s focus group was taken up with an exercise to identify some of the issues of interest to libraries and repository managers in an OA e-book-’enabled’ world. The 12 attendees divided into four groups of three and brainstormed using post-it notes (pink: ‘big issues’; blue: opportunities, yellow: questions) on charts divided into four areas for consideration: technical, financial, attitudinal, and administrative. We were then each asked to ‘vote’ on the issues we felt were most important/worthy of discussion, using little red stickers.

I took photos of the four charts:

OAPEN-UK focus group 4 OAPEN-UK focus group 3

OAPEN-UK focus group 2 OAPEN-UK focus group 1

Here’s a list of just a few of the interesting discussions that came out of the exercise:

  • What will be the attitude of subject specialists – if selection isn’t tied up with a financial burden to the university library, will they feel they have lost control of the selection process? Libraries will expect good, accurate, and correctable metadata and selection tools… or will we see a national, shared OA e-books ‘firehose’ feed with little or no selection at the institutional level?
  • How will the vendors of e-book aggregation services and platforms react? And what will be the effect of their reaction on libraries who subscribe to their services? Will we see a model where publishers/aggregators charge for ‘added value’ to a basic OA offering?
  • Does ‘Open Access’ equate to ‘access in perpetuity’? Whose responsibility will it be to ensure continued access? Will we need a LOCKSS/UK Research Reserve-type approach to looking after OA e-books? What should be the role of the JISC/legal deposit libraries/other national bodies in this (to set standards and accredit/certificate universities, perhaps)?
  • Who pays in a future OA e-book ecosystem? We’re not on familiar gold/green journal OA territory. What about author royalties – how will they be collected? Will they suffer, and how? Are libraries being pushed into a new ‘big deal’, this time for e-books (and can OA help)?

Flying Scotsman in sunlight at KGXAt this point, unfortunately—and typically—I had to dash for my train. But I’ll be following the OAPEN-UK project with great interest; it’s one I hope to come back to in future.

Some links:

Taking the register

Posted on May 23rd, 2011 by Paul Stainthorp

In talking about authentication issues, the notion kept coming up that single, central, shared registries of information about libraries (e.g. the WorldCat Registry) could be valuable in helping publishers to make it easier for users to navigate to subscribed content via their own institution’s login option(s).

This spurred me to thinking: in what central/shared registries are our library details held, and what use can I [and our students/staff] make of this information?

This’ll be one of those blog posts that I’m still adding to in a year’s time, as I remember more stuff. I’ve(And a passing thought – wouldn’t it be cool if there was a single über-registry for libraries that brought all of these details together using a single API? Anyone?)

The University of Lincoln has library information registered with:

1. ISIL – International Standard Identifier for Libraries

An ISIL is like an ISBN or ISSN for an entire library: a way of uniquely and unambiguously identifying “an organization, or one of its subordinate units, throughout its life“. We have an ISIL for each of our five libraries, assigned to us a year ago by the British Library (the UK national agency for the ISIL). We use them for RFID stock control; to associate a copy of a book with its home library. The ISIL standard is ISO 15511:2009. Our five ISILs are:

GB-UkLiUGCW University of Lincoln: Great Central Warehouse University Library
GB-UkLiUTRR University of Lincoln: Theology Reading Room, Chad Varah House
GB-UkLiURPC University of Lincoln: Riseholme Park Campus Library
GB-UkSnHOC University of Lincoln: Holbeach Campus Library
GB-UkHlHUC University of Lincoln: Hull Campus Library

2. LibraryThing local

LibraryThing local (www.librarything.com/local) is a user-maintained directory and “gateway to thousands of local bookstores, libraries and book festivals“. LibraryThing users can create and edit entries for individual libraries, browse libraries by geographical area (including via a nice Google Maps display), add libraries to a list of favourites, and subscribe to RSS feeds of library events in their area (e.g.). We don’t really make use of these features – we don’t run a lot of ‘public’ events at the moment.

We’ve had directory entries since 2009 for four out of our five libraries, which I’ve “claimed” using my own LT account – writing this, I’ve noticed that the Theology Reading Room doesn’t have an entry.

  1. University of Lincoln – GCW University Library
  2. University of Lincoln – Theology Reading Room [no entry]
  3. University of Lincoln – Riseholme Park Campus Library
  4. University of Lincoln – Hull Campus Library
  5. University of Lincoln – Holbeach Campus Library

3. OpenURL registry

Our OpenURL link resolver (EBSCO LinkSource) is registered with the OpenURL Router service, maintained by EDINA for all UK HE and FE institutions. The registry holds details of our base URL for constructing links, our preferred link resolver button image Find it @ Lincoln, and our authentication details (UK Federation scope and IP ranges).

Registry entry at:

Service providers can construct OpenURLs for our users with the base URL: http://openurl.ac.uk/

4. Talis Silkworm Directory

We have (had?) entries in the Talis Silkworm Directory (directory.­talis.­com) for all five of our libraries. This is (was?) a community-driven open directory of information about libraries, that powers (powered?) mashups like Philip Adams’ SCONUL Access libraries maps on the De Montfort University library website.

As you can probably tell from my present/past tense confusion above, I don’t know if this directory is still operational. I’d heard it was defunct some time ago, and it now appears that the directory.talis.com subdomain has been switched off.

5. Social networking websites

The GCW University Library has a page on Foursquare, the “location-based mobile platform that makes cities easier to use and more interesting to explore”. An interesting one this – it’s not a library-focused service, and not one we ‘control’ (though the official @unilincoln Twitter account is listed as ‘staff’), but probably the site that most of our users will interact with.

We also have a Flickr profile: I used it to upload a set of (mainly) historical photos of the GCW building, back in October/November 2008. I haven’t used it since. We’ve never bothered with specific Library accounts on Twitter or Facebook*.

6. UK Access Management Federation

We’re a member of the UK Access Management Federation: this controls all sorts of authentication to third-party electronic resources and comes with its own set of jargon:

7. WorldCat Registry

This is the newest one on me: although I think I remember someone from OCLC (Mark Allcock?) talking about it at the first UK Mashed Library event in 2008; it was only a Twitter conversation last week that promopted me to look at it in earnest.

Again, four out of our five libraries already have profiles (which I’ve now “claimed”). I’m still exploring the site, and I haven’t yet updated/registered all of our details, so I’m not entirely sure what benefits we can get from it – I’d appreciate any advice from WorldCat Registry old hands. I don’t understand how the WorldCat Registry relates to the WorldCat Affiliate Tools—if at all—either.

  1. University of Lincoln, GCW University Library
  2. University of Lincoln, Theology Reading Room [no entry]
  3. University of Lincoln, Riseholme Park Campus Library
  4. University of Lincoln, Hull Campus Library
  5. University of Lincoln, Holbeach Campus Library

8. Document supply (added 23 May 2011)

Owen Stephens suggested this one. We’re listed in the British Library’s Directory of Library Codes for document supply, where we have our own identifier (it’s HL/C-3). I’m sure my colleagues in inter-library loans won’t hit me for not knowing that off the top of my head.

Repository team news & report on RSP Winter School #rspws11

Posted on February 24th, 2011 by Paul Stainthorp

The latest news from the Repository team at the University of Lincoln:

RSP Winter School 2011

I was lucky enough to attend the three-day Repositories Support Project Winter School (#rspws11), which this year was held in the impressive surroundings of Armathwaite Hall near Bassenthwaite in the Lake District. As you can see from my photos, it was a real hardship.

Avenue of trees #rspws11

The programme included a keynote address by the immensely switched-on Professor Martin Hall, V-c of the University of Salford (and the first UK V-c on Twitter!), which touched on archaeology, museums, data preservation, open access, mobile learning, and the meaning of the modern university. The remaining speakers and discussions over the three days seemed to relate to two main topics:

  1. Data preservation and OA to datasets: Max Wilkinson on the work of the British Library and the BL datasets programme (bl.uk/datasets); Miggie Pickton from the University of Northampton about their ‘KeepIt‘ project to preserve university research data.

The consensus about research data seems to be this: don’t rely on your existing processes for your ‘publications’ repository. Keep a clear wall between a publications repository and a data archive. The requirements for describing/cataloguing, preserving, and providing access (sensitive data, etc.) are all just too different for datasets and publications. Also, there seems to be a general agreement that a more national, shared approach is appropriate for datasets than the strongly institutional focus of publication repositories.

_DSC9268

  1. The options for CRISes and Repositories when gathering data for the REF: presentations from Keith Jeffery; Mark Cox

It slowly emerged that there seem to be at least two different approaches to REF data-preparation that universities are taking: some [generally large, research-intensive universities] are investing heavily in a CRIS (which is impacting on the role of the Repository); others [generally the smaller HEIs, though with notable exceptions] are developing and enhancing their existing Repository systems, and relying on EPrints/DSpace to do more heavy lifting.

Bassenthwaite Lake

Interestingly, there was relatively little talk of e-theses in all this. We did however manage to slip in an advert for the UKCoRR members’ meeting (tomorrow!)

Slides and notes from the various presentations and workshops are available to download from the RSP’s website.

Tweets bearing the Winter School’s hashtag #rspws11 are preserved in a Twapper Keeper archive.

Armathwaite Hall

Meanwhile, back home in Lincoln…

And at our regular Repository team meeting on Friday, 18 February. It seems to be a particularly busy time, Repository-wise, at the moment. Welcome to David Young who came to his first Friday team meeting.

Present: Bev Jones (BJ), Paul Stainthorp (PS), Rosaline Smith (RS), David Young (DY).

  1. We’ve hit 2,800 items on the Repository, which is a credit to Lincoln’s academic staff, as well as to the tireless efforts of RS and BJ! We’re aiming for 3,000 items by the end of April, 2011. If we hit that target, I’ll be doing some more baking.
  2. There are a number of useful training events on at the moment: some organised by the RSP (e.g. this one), as well as this extremely valuable-looking non-RSP event in Glasgow. Many of the events relate in some way to getting data in/out of repositories for REF purposes (c.f. the discussions at the Winter School, above). Unfortunately, Lincoln people aren’t able to attend many of these events, so PS and DY are going to meet to discuss the possibility of running/arranging a similar event in the East Midlands.
  3. The group discussed some EPrints tweaks: publisher search, the ability to ‘bounce’ a Repository record from one owner to another, the perennial unique author IDs …all of which are possible and in place in at least one other EPrints repository. We also touched upon our succession/emergency planning (i.e. how would the Library cope if and when the volume of Repository traffic outstrips our resource to deal with it: our “Plan X“.)
  4. RS updated us on the Kultivate project: there’s another workshop in London on Monday, 28 February; RS is still planning a meeting with the Faculty of Art, Architecture & Design. RS has issued her final reminder by mass email to academic staff, asking them to attend a Repository workshop or/and to get in touch to discuss depositing their items.
  5. BJ reported that all Repository records from the calendar years 2010/2011 (so far) are now identifiable to a quarter. (We need this level of specificity to produce our Quarterly Research Output Reports.) However, there’s still some confusion over exactly how we can construct date-limited queries in EPrints – BJ is going to ask on the eprints_tech and UKCoRR mailing lists to see if we can get a definitive answer.
  6. Now-quite-finally, I (PS) ran through a number of things I’m going to bring to the next Repository steering group: including technical developments and where we might need to take EPrints in the run-up to the REF, as well as improving the Repository’s presence on our corporate website. I’m also going to speak to the chair of the steering group (University Librarian, Ian Snowley) about the date of the next meeting.
  7. Did I mention it’s the UKCoRR meeting tomorrow?

Bassenthwaite morning reflection

#blgk and #evolvingenglish

Posted on December 15th, 2010 by Paul Stainthorp

I’m blogging from the balcony of the Cotton Room, overlooking the atrium of the British Library at St Pancras. (I’ve been attending a meeting in London today, and to save money I booked two single, off-peak train tickets: leaving me with plenty of time to explore the BL.)

I’ve based myself here for the day because:

  1. The British Library is committed to making information of all kinds as widely available as possible.” Translation: good, reliable, free wifi FTW.
  2. I particularly wanted to visit the BL’s “Growing Knowledge: the evolution of research” exhibition (hashtag:#blgk), which is all about innovative tools for digital research. It’s worth a look (you don’t have to visit the smart, white digital exhibition suite at St Pancras; you can register online and explore many of the tools over the Web). There’s some good stuff here: some of the services and discussions could be useful additional material for our own ‘Working on the Web‘ staff workshops, and I’m particularly interested in the Research Information Centre (a still-in-development BL/Microsoft Research project to build a scientific VRE [Virtual Research Environment]): of obvious relevance to the University of Lincoln’s own VRE project work (more about which soon). Register/log in, and you can watch a video about the RIC. I also filled in their evaluation survey for Growing Knowledge.
  3. The other exhibition on at the moment is Evolving English; a trawl through the historical, social and cultural roots of the English language. It’s fantastic. If you’re at all interested in languages, and you’re in London before April 2011, you should go. I sat in a booth and recorded myself reading a Mr Tickle story, for their English dialect/accent map. (Hashtag:#evolvingenglish)