- NISO is a non-profit trade association that develops standards related to publishing. It has over 150 members and focuses on areas like metadata, identifiers, and discovery. - NISO is currently working on standards around presenting e-journals, open discovery of content, demand-driven acquisition of books, and open access metadata indicators. - The e-journal standard provides guidelines for title display, ISSN use, and citations. Open discovery aims to help libraries assess content participation in discovery services. Demand-driven acquisition is developing a flexible model for libraries. Open access metadata focuses on clear readership rights indicators.

1. Expanding the Possible:
What’s New and Upcoming in Standards
and Technologies for Publishing
Nettie Lagace, NISO (@abugseye)
SSP 36th Annual Meeting, Boston
May 29, 2014

2. What’s NISO?
• Non-profit industry trade association accredited
by ANSI with 150+ members
• Mission of developing and maintaining standards
related to information, documentation, discovery
and distribution of published materials and
media
• Represent US interests to ISO TC46 (Information
and Documentation) and also serve as Secretariat
for ISO TC46/SC 9 (Identification and Description)
• Volunteer driven organization: 400+ spread out
across the world

3. Holdings Statements for Bibliographic Items
Printed Information on Spines
Single-Tier Steel Bracket Library Shelving
Data Elements for Binding Library Materials
Information Interchange Format (basis for MARC)
The U.S. National Z39.50 Profile for Library Applications
International Standard Serial Numbering (ISSN)
Dublin Core Metadata Element Set
Syntax for the Digital Object Identifier
The OpenURL Framework for Context-Sensitive Services
Ranking of Authentication and Access Methods Available to the Metasearch Environment
NISO Metasearch XML Gateway Implementers Guide
NISO is the force behind

4. Definitions and Principles
Balance: no single interest category constitutes a majority of
the membership / voting pool / working group: producer, user,
general interest
4
Recommended PracticeStandard
Consensus: respond to all comments and make efforts to resolve
negative votes, even if proposal is approved
Open process: allowing members and the community to
have confidence in NISO standards.
OA
MI

5. Considerations
• Value to be gained
• Feasibility
• Community(ies) affected
• Stakeholders (Vested interests)
• Participants required/desired
• Timeframes
5

6. Typical RP Working Group phases
• Project is approved by Topic Committee & NISO
Voting Members
• Group is assembled
• Research/assembly period
• Initial RP draft written
• Public Review and Comment period
• Working Group will address and potentially
incorporate Comments
• NISO Approval
• NISO Publication as a Recommended Practice

7. Today
• Presentation and Identification of E-Journals
(PIE-J)
• Open Discovery Initiative (ODI)
• Demand Driven Acquisition (DDA)
• Open Access Metadata and Indicators (OAMI)

8. PIE-J RP
NOW
AVAILABLE!
http://www.niso.org/workrooms/piej
Full 67 page Recommended Practice
includes positive examples of each
point listed and additional related
Appendix materials.

9. PIE-J Recommended Practice
• Developed in order to provide guidance on
the presentation of e-journals,
• particularly in the areas of title presentation,
accurate use of ISSN, and citation practices,
• to publishers and platform providers to help
end users accurately locate cited material as
well as to solve some long-standing concerns
of serials librarians

10. PIE-J Highlights
The recommended practice guidelines address the following:
• Retention of title and citation information under which articles were
originally published
• Display of title histories, including information relating to title changes and
related metadata
• Display of correct ISSN for different formats and for changed titles
• Retention and display of vital publication information across the history of
a journal,
• including publisher names; clear numbering and dates; editors, editorial
boards, and sponsoring organizations; and frequency of publication
• Graphic design and inclusion of information that allows easy access to
• all content
• Special considerations for retroactive digitization

11. Tri-fold Print Version: Electronic Version:
These are both two page brochures
focused on the main points in the
recommended practice

12. Representative
Example
• One examples from
the Appendix
• Clearly indicates the
point being
illustrated
• Links in the caption
point to the relevant
recommendation(s)

13. The Open Discovery Initiative

14. The context for ODI
• Emergence of Library Discovery Services solutions
– Based on index of a wide range of content
– Commercial and open access
– Primary journal literature, ebooks, and more
• Adopted by thousands of libraries around the world,
and impact millions of users
14

15. General Goals
• Define ways for libraries to assess the level of
content providers’ participation in discovery services
• Help streamline the process by which content
providers work with discovery service vendors
• Define models for “fair” linking from discovery
services to publishers’ content
• Determine what usage statistics should be collected
for libraries and for content providers
15

16. Subgroups
• Technical recommendations for data format
and data transfer
• Communication of library’s rights/Descriptors
regarding level of indexing
• Definition of fair linking
• Exchange of usage data
16

17. Deliverables
• Vocabulary
• NISO Recommended Practice
– Data format and data transfer
– Library rights to specific content
– Level of indexing
– Fair linking
– Usage statistics
• Mechanisms to evaluate conformance with
recommended practice
17

18. Demand-Driven Acquisition
of Monographs

19. Working Group Goals
• Develop a flexible model for DDA that works
for publishers, vendors, aggregators, and
libraries
• Model should allow for DDA programs that:
– Meet local budget and collection needs
– Allow for consortial participation
– Support cross-aggregator implementation
– Account for how DDA impacts all functional areas
of the library

20. Recommendations
1. Establishing Goals
2. Choosing Content to Make Available
3. Choosing DDA Models
4. Profiling
5. Loading records
6. Removing content
7. Assessment
8. Preservation
9. Consortial DDA
10. Public library DDA

21. Open Access
Metadata and Indicators

23. Why is This Necessary?
Growth of OA + More Funder Mandates + Hybrids
=
Lots of OA papers with different associated rights
and responsibilities =
Confusion concerning who can do what when

24. Audience Segments
• Readers
• Authors
• Publishers
• Funders
• Search engines/discovery services
• Academic Libraries

25. Working Group’s Objectives
1. A specified format for bibliographic metadata and
possibly, a set of visual signals, describing the
readership rights associated with a single scholarly
work
2. Recommended mechanisms for publishing and
distributing this metadata
3. A report on the feasibility of including clear
information on downstream re-use rights within the
current project and, if judged feasible, inclusion of
these elements in outputs 1 and 2
4. A report stating how the adoption of these outputs
would answer (or not) specific use cases to be
developed by the Working Group

26. “open access” politically fraught
• Won’t use this label
Factual information:
– Is a specified work free to read – can it be
accessed by anyone who has access to the Web?
– What re-use rights are granted to this reader?
• Minimal set of metadata needed
• Decided not to create/recommend a logo

27. <free_to_read> Tag
• Indicates content can be read or viewed by
any user without payment or authentication
• Simple attribute of “yes” or “no”
• Optional start and end dates to accommodate
embargoes, special offers, etc.
<free_to_read="no" start_date="2014-02-3”
end_date=”2015-02-03"/>
<free_to_read="yes" start_date="2015-02-3”/>

28. • Content of this tag would include a stable identifier
expressed as an HTTP URI
• URI would point to license terms that are human and/or
machine readable
• Multiple URIs can be listed if article exists under specific
license for certain period of time and then changes
<license_ref start_date="2014-02-
03">http://www.psychoceramics.org/license_v1.html</li
cense_ref>
<license_ref start_date="2015-02-
03">http://www.psychoceramics.org/open_license.html</
license_ref>
<license_ref> Tag

29. Distributing Metadata
• Who? Publishers, aggregators, content
providers
• Include the metadata in all standard metadata
sets
– Intended that this population/distribution will
become part of standard editorial and production
workflows
• Could also include in alerts such as e-TOCs and
RSS feeds and A&I feeds

30. Get involved!
• Subscribe to NISO Newsline
Send an e-mail to newsline-subscribe@list.niso.org - put “Subscribe Newsline” in the subject line.
– see announcements of new efforts
– read Working Group Connection
• Volunteer for Working Groups & Committees;
Education Committee
• NISO Website
• NISO Webinars, in-person Forums, & Open
Teleconferences – every month!
• Standards Updates @ industry conferences
30

31. Thank you! Questions?