Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
It’s all about: Metadata Standards and Best Practice for E-Resources
Improving Discoverability and Accessibility of E-content
Electronic Resources: Librarians and Vendors Round Table
Issues and standards
Background & Workshop: Shi DengSurvey Report: Chengzhi Wang
Task Force Draft Plan for Input: Bie-Hwa MaThursday, March 27, 2014
BackgroundCEAL Task Force on Metadata Standards and Best Practices for East Asian Electronic Resources
Proposed by Bie-Hwa Ma in 2012 CEAL CTP Annual program in her presentation Strengthening the Chinese Electronic Resources Supply Chain with Standards and Best Practices
More groundwork was done by Bie-Hwa Ma to contact CTP and National group leaders
CEAL Task Force was formed under CEAL Executive Board in Nov. 2013
Task Force Charges: Investigates the best practices, address the issues Promotes compliance with well-established metadata
standards and best practices Liaison with national and international working groups Organize training workshops and educational programs
Workshop : The Start of ERMB Work
“Workshop on Electronic Resources Standards and Best Practices”: held on Tuesday, March 25, 2014
Participant Demographics Covered Topics
KBART, OpenURL, DOI, and IOTA Member presentation of CJK E-resources metadata and
presentation problems that cause access and discovery issues
PIE-J, ISSN, ISNI, and ORCID Survey results on vendor and librarian awareness of the E-
resources standards and best practices Partial Workshop Evaluation
Survey: Towards Better Understanding of Issues & Standards
Survey Report: Survey Goal Participant Demographics Preliminary Results in Some Major Aspects:
Survey demographics Awareness of standards and best practices Compliance of standards and best practices Challenging issues that affect compliance Selected comments
Survey: Goal
Environmental Scan: Survey as a Systematic Way to Get Empirical Data
Preliminary Understanding of the Level of Awareness
Where Are The Awareness Gaps of/between Librarians And Vendors, and How to Bridge Them
Improving Understanding, Expanding Knowledge, Enhancing Skills, Determining Areas/Topics to Work on
Survey Demographics: 73 Participants of Library Survey
Region\Library ARL ARL, SL CL NL, SpL Other PL SL Total
Australia 1 1Europe 1 1HK 8 1 9Japan 10 1 11Korea 1 1Singapore 1 1Taiwan 6 3 1 10U.S. 24 1 25Mainland China 11 1 2 14Total 63 3 1 1 1 1 3 73
Survey Demographics: Library Survey Position
Library director/head 13 18%
Librarian 53 73%
Non-librarian series professional (curator, archivist, etc.)
0 0%
Support staff 6 8%Other 1 1%
Library director
1318%
Librarian53
73%
Support staff6
8%
Library Survey: Languages of Resources Primarily Managed/Served
Chinese 49 30%
Japanese 30 19%
Korean 16 10%
English 56 35%
Tibetan 3 2%
Manchu 3 2%
Mongolian 2 1%
Other 3 2%Chinese
Japanese
Korean
English
Tibetan
Manchu
Mongolian
Other
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Survey Demographics: 22 Participants of Vendors Survey
Publisher 10 26%Vendor/Provider/Aggregator 18 47%Platform provider 7 18%Identifier registry provider (e.g., DOI registration agency) 2 5%Other 1 3%
Mainland China 3 14%Taiwan 5 23%Japan 7 32%Korea 6 27%North America 1 5%
0-5 years 6 27%6-10 years 4 18%11-15 years 6 27%16+ years 6 27%
Survey Demographics: Library Survey & Vendor Survey
Vendors/Publishers
Library Staff
Main-land
China3
14%
Taiwan
523%Japan
732%
Korea6
27%
North America1
5%
Australia1
1%
Europe1
1%
HK9
12% Japan11
15%
Korea1
1%
Sin-gapor
e1
1%Taiwan
1014%
U.S.25
34%
Main-land
China14
19%
11
Awareness of E-Resources Standards & Best Practices: Library and Vendors
Are you aware that there are established national and international standards and best practices for describing electronic resources (or for providing bibliographic data)?
Vendors/PublishersLibrary Staff
Yes30
43%
No20
29%
Not sure20
29%Yes8
38%
No4
19%
No, but wish to know more
943%
Compliance of Standards & Best Practices: Currently Follow & Interested in Following
Marc 21 8 15% OpenURL 9 16%Other classfication 7 13% DOI 8 14%OpenURL 6 11% Marc 21 7 12%
ISSN, ISBN, ISRC, or other publication identifiers 6 11% ISSN, ISBN, ISRC, or other publication identifiers 6 11%
PIE-J 5 9% KBART 4 7%KBART 4 7% PIE-J 3 5%DOI 4 7% Other subject headings 3 5%LCSH 3 5% Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) 3 5%Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) 3 5% AACR2 2 4%AACR2 2 4% RDA 2 4%RDA 2 4% LCSH 2 4%ONIX 2 4% LC Classification 2 4%ONIX-PL 1 2% Other classification 2 4%
Name authority headings (VIAF, LCNAF, etc.) 1 2% Creator/contributor identifiers (ISNI, ORCID, etc.) 2 4%
Other 1 2% ONIX 1 2%PCC guidelines, CSR, BSR, P-N E-Resource 0 0% Name authority headings (VIAF, LCNAF, etc.) 1 2%Other subject headings 0 0% PCC guidelines, CSR, BSR, P-N E-Resource 0 0%LC Classification 0 0% ONIX-PL 0 0%Creator/contributor identifiers (ISNI, ORCID, etc.) 0 0% Other 0 0%
Reasons Why Vendors not Complying with Standards & Best Practices
We will consider complying with the standards for the future resources/databases, but not for the existing ones as it is too time consuming and costly to change what we have designed
6 21%
Such metadata do not accommodate the needs of CJK resources/scripts 5 18%
Complying with the standards increases the product cost in human resource, facilities of hardware and software, etc. 5 18%
Such metadata do not necessarily eliminate problems 4 14%
Unawareness of the standards 3 11%Lack metadata expertise to provide certain metadata 3 11%Standards are too complicated to understand 1 4%Other 1 4%
Selected Survey Comments: Expectations
Librarian: Come up with a set of realistic and useful metadata standards suitable for East Asian languages and work with vendors for them to learn and implement the standards. Judging by the difficulty of enforcing full standards, it might be necessary to draft a set of “basic” or “minimal” requirements in addition to the full standards.
Librarian: I hope there is a strong external pressure on Japanese publishers and libraries because I feel that there are many problems which cannot be solved if one has not been evolved like the creatures in the Galapagos Islands.
Librarian: It will be nice if the TF can go over details and examples to help me actually take the survey if you are considering any follow-up survey. I need to (have) more basic and beginner level information about metadata standard and practices.
Selected Survey Comments: Expectations
Support staff: Metadata for Display: simple descriptive, allowing contents in CJK. Metadata for Managing Records: Technical requirements and Preservation Information.
Librarian: Most Japanese vendors have not yet been able to respond to the situation, and that creates many challenges.
Librarian: With the strong support of the CEAL Task Force on Metadata Standards and Best Practices, more metadata standards for East Asian Electronic Resources will be promoted and applied. Thank you very much for your great efforts and hard work!
Selected Survey Comments: Further Explanations
Librarian: Electronic resources are mostly managed by our main library. As a result, some of my answers related to vendors' services might not reflect the complete picture.
Librarian: This survey made me realize what I need to start thinking about in terms of metadata availability and management, and how little I know about what's been available for some resources I acquire. It was little too technical for me at this point. I couldn't really answer any of above questions for J and K resources. And I am too fortunate to have e-resource and acquisitions colleagues to take care of metadata issues for English resources on Japan and Korea. So I wasn't able to provide good answer for English resources, either. I also found it kind of confusing not to be able to focus on one language if I were to provide the answer. Because of my vague understanding about metadata practice, I sometimes wasn't able to distinguish differences between several questions. I definitely need to learn more about the topic. So the survey questions will be useful to start learning about it. Thank you very much for your efforts and energy to create this comprehensive survey.
Draft PlanTo be finalized with your input!
What the Task Force Plans to Do Sets up communication channels Creates cheat sheets of Standards and Best Practices Gathers comments in response to calls for reviewing standards or
best practices Holds CJK language Webinars on specific standards and best
practices Pre-conference Workshops Information HUB at CEAL ERMB Task Force Website Promotes Collaboration
Possible 1-year Program
A preconference workshop on certain e-resources metadata standards and best practices (MSBPs)
CJK Webinar for those MSBPs
Cheat sheets/checklists for those MSBPs
Send comments related to CJK issues for new or revised E-R MSBPs
Opportunities for Communication and Collaboration 8/22 vendors knew and 9/22 would like to learn about E-Resources
standards Although not currently compliant with standards, many vendors
are interested in following them Most vendors think it more feasible to comply with the standards
and best practices in the future products, but not for the established databases
Let’s continue the communication and collaboration to achieve the Win-Win-Win Outcome for vendors/publishers, librarians, and ultimately, for our users
Communication & Collaboration => Win-Win-Win Outcome
The Outcome and Our Prizes
Compliance with Standards and Best Practices> Resolutions for Most Access/Discovery Issues
> Usage Increase> Renewal and Better Sale
Request for Next Step for Roundtable
One or more continued CEAL-sponsored platform for communication among librarians,
publishers, and vendors
