Shared CataloguingThe Next Generation

Dr Paul AyrisDirector of UCL Library ServicesPresident of LIBER (Association of European Research Libraries)E-mail: p.ayris@ucl.ac.uk

Contents

• The Problem• RLUK Response• User Needs and Expectations• Open and Linked Data• Emerging Standards and Technologies• Copyright and IPR in Open Bibliographic Data• What Needs to change?• The Benefits of the Cloud• Next Steps

The Problem

Our key finding is that the current arrangements for producing and distributing bibliographic data for both books and journals involve duplications of efforts, gaps in the available data, and missed opportunities. ...[T]here would be considerable benefits if libraries, and other organisations in the supply chain, were to operate more at the network level.

RLUK Response

• Establish a Working Group to look at the problem and to model Recommendations– The potential for a national bibliographic resource based on COPAC– Cost savings available to libraries through deep sharing of back-room

processes– The needs of students and researchers for resource discovery and

retrieval– The impact of new tools in library management systems to change

current practices– The reliability and sustainability of cloud computing approaches

MembersPaul Ayris (Chair) - UCL Sandra Bracegirdle - Manchester UniversityRachel Bruce - JISCStuart Hunt - University of WarwickElizabeth James - V&AMike Mertens - RLUKAndy McGregor - JISCKathryn Murray - National Library of WalesDavid Prosser - RLUK Debby Shorley - Imperial College LondonBen Showers - JISC June Tomlinson - Wellcome TrustNick Woolley - King's College London

Open and Linked Data

• The Open Knowledge Foundation identifies 4 advantages to libraries opening up their bibliographic data– Shared cataloguing– New services

• Linked Data refers to a set of Best Practices for connecting structured data on the web

• Library catalogue becomes re-positioned in terms of its relationship to the wider context of the web, and the social network of links that the web represents

• Benefits to a shared approach– Cost savings– Improved access

User Needs and Expectations

• At the most basic level, questions from researchers and students are– Have you got x?– What do you have about y?– Followed by How can I get access to it?

• Any shared cataloguing solutions must provide answers to both questions

• In an electronic environment, users increasingly expect links to the digital full text, not just a catalogue record

User Needs and Expectations

• Short-Term Recommendations (6)– Develop a Programme to build and maintain a national registry

of digitised freely-available and accessible books and journals– Implement a sharing of resources or procurement of enriched

data such as searchable table of contents and abstract/summary information

– Investigate shared preservation flags to indicate permanent retention. Thereby enabling collaborative collection management

User Needs and Expectations

• Longer Term Recommendations (4)– Libraries have problems in acquiring bibliographic records for

20-30% of their intake. Establish workflows to remove this barrier

– Develop a shared cataloguing programme for foreign-language materials

– Implement user registration system which is linked to access and delivery functionality

Emerging Standards and Technologies

• ERM processes are complex and fragmented– Lack of reliable, quality data– Libraries duplicate workflows

• Catalogue needs to move from being the centre of its own narrow world, to being part of a wider web environment

• RLUK to investigate deriving metadata from member libraries, either by direct harvesting or by linking to institutional repositories

Emerging Standards and Technologies

• A shared cataloguing service requires shared standards. • RLUK, with MIMAS, to investigate the support of the FRBR

(Functional Requirement for Bibliographic Records) entity-relationship model with the RLUK database and COPAC

• RLUK to take a lead on the implementation of RDA (Resource Description and Access) in the UK

• Libraries should anticipate that MARC21 will be superseded • RLUK to investigate developing an automated re-classification

service based on classmarks in the RLUK database• RLUK to encourage member libraries to adopt accepted

international standards for authority control

Copyright and IPR in Open Bibliographic data

• Growing body of activity in the area of Open Bibliographic Data• Jens Vigen, Librarian at Cern, says: ‘Librarians should act as they preach:

data sets created through public funding should be freely available to anyone interested’

• What sort of licences should be assigned to Open Data?– In the vast majority of circumstances. Institutions should use a

Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY) to encourage re-use of copyrightable material

– Creative Commons now offers a license for data with their CC0 activity

• But Open licences cannot over-ridge pre-existing contracts. Issue should be dealt with when contracts are re-negotiated

What needs to change?

• Movement from local solutions to shared services• Manual intervention in compiling COPAC database needs to be

minimised• Users would like to access E-Books via COPAC• Undergraduates are not currently heavy users of COPAC. Personalisation

and recommender services could make COPAC more attractive to this community

• For researchers and students, duplicate records impede efficient discovery

• RLUK needs fundamentally to embrace the concept of COPAC as a true shared service, akin to the HECCE-sponsored ERM solution being developed under SCONUL

What needs to change? Recommendations

• Any new system should have the concept of a Master record• Harvesting should be the technology for adding records to COPAC• De-duplication becomes a more important part of the workflow• RLUK lobbies JISC to offer a merged aggregation of SUNCAT and

COPAC in the context of JISC-RLUK Discovery work• Any system should extend to large-scale coverage of E-Books• Any system should have extensive range of APIs for the creation of

web applications potentially for use via mobile devices

A Cloud Approach?Summary of the Gains and Benefits

• Inevitable that the future of shared discovery services lies in the Cloud– Infrastructure, software, services and professional staff input will be devolved to the

Cloud away from any local institution– Current bibliographic landscape is riddled with duplicated effort and inefficiencies

• Harvesting and linking replace earlier ideas of upload and download• We replace the idea of ‘copy’ with the idea of ‘view’, and of upgrading and

enriching• Move to the Cloud enables a Universal mode of description such as XML,

paving the way towards Linked Data• OCLC and Ex Libris demonstrated their solutions to the Working Group

Possible scenarios• Alma could be system which stores united database of

RLUK members, effectively replacing COPAC• Alma has sophisticated metadata management tools,

which mean Alma could replace the current RLUK bibliographic database

• Best solution is for Alma to stand in for both local and central management of systems?– Local library management functions – Centrally shared metadata catalogue (community zone)

RLUK Cloud Solution?

• Metadata issues outlined above will need to be addressed• RLUK databases need to be re-positioned in the wider context of the web

– Expand coverage to include new media types, e.g. blogs and wikis

• Shared community approach to cataloguing has a number of benefits• Shared cataloguing service reduces the footprint of local library

management system and so will redefine how libraries work• Recommendations: • That funding is identified to investigate the requirements and feasibility

of a shared UK cataloguing service• To co-sponsor with the JISC a full cost-benefit analysis of providing an

overall, above-campus shared cataloguing system solution

• If you have been…

• Thanks for listening

• Happy to try and answer any questions