View
224
Download
3
Category
Tags:
Preview:
Citation preview
The COUNTER Code of Practice
Peter ShepherdProject Director
COUNTER
Background: 1
Libraries need online usage statistics To assess the value of different online products/services To make better-informed purchasing decisions To plan infrastructure
Publishers need online usage statistics To experiment with new pricing models To assess the relative importance of the different
channels by which information reaches the market To provide editorial support To plan infrastructure, site design, etc
STM publishing is global
Online usage statistics need to be…….
CredibleConsistentCompatible
“We conclude that it is largely impossible to compare data across vendors, and we recommend that comparison be limited to data from the same vendorsWe believe that the comprehensive standardisation of usage statistics and data delivery methods cannot be easily achieved in the short term”
ARL E-Metrics Phase II Report, Oct 2001
... the answer is…...
COUNTER - endorsed by…
AAP, Association of American Publishers ALPSP, The Association of Learned and Professional Society
Publishers ARL, Association of Research Libraries ASA, Association of Subscription Agents and Intermediaries EDItEUR JISC, Joint Information Systems Committee NCLIS, National Commission on Libraries and Information Science NISO, National Information Standards Organization PA, The Publishers Association STM, International Association of Scientific, Technical & Medical
Publishers UKSG, United Kingdom Serials Group
2002 Objectives
Gain industry support for COUNTER Increase awareness of COUNTERDeliver Release 1 of the Code of
Practice: Focus on journals and databases Will be published on the COUNTER
website
The COUNTER Code of Practice- Strategy
Responsive to requirements of the international librarian, publishing and intermediary communities An open, inclusive and interactive process Representation of all three communities on COUNTER Comments welcome on the Code of Practice
Limit scope of Release 1 to journals and databases Systematically extend scope of Code of Practice
Horizontally, to cover other content types, such as e-books Vertically, to provide, e.g., usage statistics for individual
articles Only one valid version of the Code of Practice at any time A cost-effective process for all parties involved
The COUNTER Code of Practice- main features
Definitions of terms used Specifications for usage reports Data processing guidelines Auditing Compliance Maintenance and development of the Code of
Practice Governance of COUNTER
Definitions of terms used
Data elements to be collected Page views
Bibliographic data, e.g. ‘Online ISSN’ Page type, e.g. ‘full-text article’ Source of page, e.g. ‘referred from an aggregator or
gateway’ Authentication of user, e.g. ‘IP address Access rights, e.g. ‘Turnaway’
Session data, e.g. ‘End time’ Market elements, e.g. ‘Consortium member’
Specifications for usage reports
Content Journal report 1: number of full-text article requests by month
and journal (Level 1) Journal Report 2: turnaways by month and journal (Level 1) Journal Report 3: number of item requests by month, journal and
page-type (Level 2) Journal Report 4: total searches by month and collection (Level
2) Database Report 1: total searches and sessions by month and
database (Level 1) Database Report 2: turnaways by month and database (Level 1) Database Report 3; Referrals by aggregator or gateway (Level
1) Format Delivery
Data processing guidelines
Only intended usage is covered Impractical to describe all possible filters for all
possible ways of generating usage records COP specifies the criteria to be met by the data
to be used in building the reports Only successful requests will be counted
For web server logs successful requests are those with a specific return code (200, 301, 302, 304 in 2002)
Records generated by the server together with the requested page should be ignored
All users’ double clicks within 10 seconds on an http-link should be counted as only one request (30 seconds for a pdf)
Auditing
Auditing will be required from 2004 Auditing processes are still being developed A list of COUNTER-approved auditors will be
made available in 2003
Compliance
More than one compliance level Level 1: basic set of journal and database reports Level 2: more detailed reports
Licence agreements Standard clause covering COUNTER compliance
Declaration of COUNTER compliance For 2003 Vendors sign declaration, and demonstrate to COUNTER
that they can provide at least Level 1 Usage Reports Register of COUNTER-compliant vendors
Maintained on the COUNTER website
Maintenance and development of the Code of Practice
Full text of the Code of practice will be freely available on the COUNTER website
Code of Practice will be systematically extended Feedback on Release 1 actively sought
Via test sites involving publishers and libraries Via feedback to COUNTER via the website, committees,
etc
Governance of COUNTER
Executive Committee Chaired by Richard Gedye (OUP)
International Advisory Board 30+ members Technical Advisory Group Marketing Committee
Project Director Peter Shepherd
2003 and beyond
Objectives for 2003 Promote and gain acceptance for the COUNTER Code of
Practice Obtain feedback on Release 1 Complete list of approved auditors Define and set up permanent administrative structure Full implementation of Code of Practice by Vendors for 2004
Beyond 2003 Extend and deepen Code of Practice
Cover e-books, etc Reporting at article level
Monitor usage and user behaviour?
COUNTER Founding Sponsors
AAP/PSP ALPSP ARL ASA Blackwell Publishing EBSCO Elsevier Science Ingenta Institute of Physics
Publishing JISC
Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins
Nature Publishing Group Oxford University Press The Publishers Association ProQuest Taylor & Francis STM UKSG
For more information……..
www.projectCounter.org
Online Librarian Survey
650 librarians responded 49 corporate librarians Responses of corporate librarians did not deviate from the whole
Focus on journals & databases Need for a small number of reliable reports Reports should be made available on a password-controlled
website, with email alerts Reports must be provided at least monthly Data must be updated within two weeks of the end of the
reporting period All of last year’s data and this year’s to date must be supplied
Vital factors for a successful implementation and uptake
‘Start small, test often’….develop a modest core Code and build out incrementally
Build continuous development capability into the support structure
Pool our collective wisdom and work together
One Code - parallel codes will attract minimal buy-in
Recommended