Ce diaporama a bien été signalé.
Nous utilisons votre profil LinkedIn et vos données d’activité pour vous proposer des publicités personnalisées et pertinentes. Vous pouvez changer vos préférences de publicités à tout moment.

Piloting an E-Journals Preservation Registry Service (PEPRS)

Presented by Peter Burnhill, Director of EDINA, at PARSE.insight workshop on Preservation, Access and Re-use of Scientific Data, Darmstadt, Germany, 22 September 2009.

  • Soyez le premier à commenter

  • Soyez le premier à aimer ceci

Piloting an E-Journals Preservation Registry Service (PEPRS)

  1. 1. Piloting an E-Journals Preservation Registry Service (PEPRS) Adapted from Progress Report to ISSN Directors’ Meeting, Beijing September 2009 Peter Burnhill Director, EDINA University of Edinburgh 1
  2. 2. Bio: I’m a data person turned into something else Began at the University of Edinburgh as a survey statistician in research centre in 1979 Changed career in 1984 to set up University Data Library then combined that with Co-director, Regional Research [GIS] Laboratory for Scotland, 1987/93 Past-President of IASSIST, 1996 - 2001 •international assoc. for data librarians and archivists www.iassistdata.org Director, Digital Curation Centre, 2004 - 2006 (Phase 1) www.dcc.ac.uk Director, EDINA national data centre, 1996 - present day
  3. 3. 3
  4. 4. Re-thinking stewardship for scholarly works The central task: • to ensure that researchers, students & their teachers have continuity of access to the online scholarly resources they need. • Digital preservation is crucial but need to keep focus on ‘continuity of access’. "I am in no way interested in immortality, but only in the taste of tea." Lu T'ung (born 755 A.D., reputedly lived 400 years)
  5. 5. Emergence of Digital Library • mix of the document tradition (signifying objects & their use) and the computation tradition (applying algorithmic, logical, mathematical, and mechanical techniques to information management) – “Both traditions are needed. Information Science is rooted in part in humanities and qualitative social sciences. The landscape of Information Science is complex. An ecumenical view is needed.” * M.Buckland, Journal of American Society for Information Science, 50 p970-74 1999 • The digital library has words, numbers, pictures and sounds – Numeric data, online learning & teaching materials, digital pictures and other audio-visual materials • What do researchers do? • And what do they want/need of a digital library – that they cannot do for themselves?
  6. 6. Infrastructure to support four ‘demand-side’ verbs discover information object of interest e.g. dataset, article referenced in database, etc locate organisation offering service e.g. data centre or document delivery service request use of service via open access, privilege of membership, payment of money access object of interest via online access, document delivery, personal visit based on MODELS workshops (UKOLN/JISC eLib)
  7. 7. Scientific / Scholarly Record I have never believed that Science equates to what is published in refereed journals but • Record of Science does contain what is published in refereed journals • Record of Scholarship (including Science) contains what is published in journals (& books)
  8. 8. What’s the Problem for E-Journal Content? • First, the Good News! – Researchers and students now have online access to journal articles * to read & download: Any-where, Any-time … • Next, the Bad News! – What is now in digital form may not always be available – Stops ‘tipping point’ from print to online * Frustrates economic benefits of existing investment in digital * Not good for libraries, not good for publishers
  9. 9. Why Worry About Digital Preservation? • All that is now digital may not always be available – for a variety of reasons * Natural disaster – Earthquake, Fire, Flood * Computing failure – Digital decay » Bit rot, Format obsolescence * Human folly – Criminal/political action » Hacking – Commercial issues » Publishers ceases publication with no transfer » Publisher goes out of business with no transfer 9
  10. 10. Some Consequences of Web • Essentials of supply chain have changed * licensed to access, not sale of content • Libraries no longer take physical custody of much key content * online remotely, not on-shelf locally • Role of libraries as trusted keepers of information and culture has been disrupted – Need assurance of continuity of access * of all content for future generations * of the back copies, post-cancellation of the licence • Scholarly, cultural & intellectual heritage is at risk
  11. 11. What’s the Answer? 1. Think: Consider how we ensured continuing access to printed works over the long term – Human-readable format; relatively enduring media (paper) – Multiple copies held in multiple places (a network of libraries) 2. Think again: Understand what is different about the digital – Formats become obsolete; unseen digital decay (‘bit rot’) – Can easily be altered (authenticity), copied and transported (theft) 3. Propose: Develop digital preservation policy • Including practices that address threats & risks 4. Act: Implement policy & practices for global effect – Need to command consensus across stakeholders (Transparency) – Need to be sustainable, in organisational, technical & financial terms 5. Reflect: Test, monitor and report: Community & Transparency
  12. 12. How important are E-journals? • 96.1% of Science journals are online • 86.5% of Arts and Humanities are online • 2006-2007 – 102,000,000 downloads – Up 21% from previous year • 17% usage is at the weekend Source. E-journals: their use, value and impact. Research Information Network. UK April 2009. 12
  13. 13. There are now lots of E-Journals and E-Serials E-journals and preservation 70,000 66,000 59,549 60,000 50,000 Thousands of journals 40,000 30,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 Ulrich ISSN Academic journals 1313131313131313131
  14. 14. Why a Preservation Registry? • Many schemes emerging to meet challenge • But who is doing what? – How can libraries & policy-makers assess which e-journals are being archived, by what methods, and under what terms of access? • JISC commissioned a scoping study for an e-journals preservation registry – the idea had been mentioned in the literature 14
  15. 15. Scoping Study Report Prior to PEPRS • Rightscom / Loughborough University, 2007 – Confirmed expressed need among libraries and policy makers – Warned of potential burden on digital preservation agencies – Recommended: * an e-journals preservation registry should be built * UK Union Catalogue of Serials (SUNCAT) or SHERPA (Open Access) get involved – SUNCAT is hosted and managed at EDINA 15
  16. 16. Piloting … PEPRS Project: Funded by JISC, • over two years, starting August 2008. – review after 18 months into prospect for move into service Partners: EDINA and ISSN International Centre (Paris) – Support of Governing Body and Directors of ISSN Network Purpose: Scope, develop & test a registry service – Establish and test an Information Architecture – Seek consensus across stakeholders – Technical & financial sustainability 16
  17. 17. PEPRS is a project funded by JISC Joint Information Systems Committee JISC manages funding from all the UK government agencies responsible for higher and further education •‘to provide world-class leadership in the innovative use of ICT to support education and research’ •JISC manages and funds more than 200 projects within 15 programmes. Outputs and lessons are made available to the HE and FE community. •JISC also supports 50 Services that provide expertise, advice, guidance and resources to address the needs of all users in HE and FE. • The three largest services are JANET(UK) - which oversees networking - and two national academic data centres, EDINA and Mimas, based respectively at the Universities of Edinburgh and Manchester 17
  18. 18. 18
  19. 19. 19
  20. 20. Location of ISSN National Centres 20
  21. 21. Project deliverables • Now mid-way in a two-year project: 1. Problem statement, including definition of user/stakeholder requirements 2. Formal statement of the information architecture and proposed m2m interfaces, standards and protocols 3. Prototype and then a working demonstrator, suitable for external evaluation an as platform for an e- journals preservation registry service 4. Business plan, with value proposition 5. Project-to-service plan, for roll-out and launch of service and phased enhancement of functionality.
  22. 22. Presentations & Publication 1. JISC Journals Working Group, London, August 2008 2. ISSN National Directors Meeting, Tunis, September 2008 3. NASIG, 24th Annual Conference, Ashville NC, USA, 4 June 2009 4. Library of Chinese Academy of Science, Beijing, 15 September 2009 5. ISSN National Directors Meeting, Beijing, 17 September 2009 6. PARSE.Insight Workshop, Darmstadt, Germany, 21 September 2009 7. … P.Burnhill, F.Pelle, P.Godefroy, F.Guy, M.Macgregor, A.Rusbridge & C.Rees Piloting an e-journals preservation registry service. Serials 22(1) March 2009. [UK Serials Group] P.Burnhill Tracking e-journal preservation: archiving registry service anyone? Against the Grain. 21(1) February 2009. pp. 32,34,36 22
  23. 23. E-Journals PEPRS Scope: Journal and other serial content in digital format – Focus on those serials with the ISSN identifier * If its worth saving, it should have an ISSN Multi-level: article is the information object of desire – Focus on Journal Title-level – Issued Content, ie Volumes (Year), Articles International: – Matters for the UK * But matters to all countries – Cannot be resolved in (national) isolation 23
  24. 24. Preservation PEPRS Scope: digital preservation agencies for journal content Multi-level: – 3rd Party organisations (eg CLOCKSS & Portico; PubMed) – National Libraries (eg BL (UK), KB (Netherlands) some with legal deposit – Libraries and library consortia (eg UK LOCKSS Alliance) 24
  25. 25. Registry PEPRS Scope: what is being done by digital preservation agencies for e-journals Multi-level: – Who can register, who decides who… – What should be registered * Intention, ingest pending (agreed), ingest in progress, ingest completion. – Self-statement of methods, using comparable vocabulary International: – Registry must be international 25
  26. 26. Service PEPRS Scope: delivering value for various use communities Multi-use communities: – Librarians – Policy makers and funders – Digital preservation agencies – Publishers – Subscription Agents – etc International: – Action taken in and for the UK – How to provide international service? 26
  27. 27. 4. Digital Preservation Agencies in the Pilot * Two 3rd Party Organisations – CLOCKSS – Portico * Two National Libraries (c.f. legal deposit) – British Library (BL) British Library e-Journal Digital Archive – Koninklijke Bibliotheek (KB e-Depot) KB, National Library of the Netherlands * One library cooperative – UK LOCKSS Alliance 27
  28. 28. 28
  29. 29. 29
  30. 30. 30
  31. 31. Legal Deposit • Works well with print via legislation and national libraries. • Countries with legislation enacted (or ‘in train’) for e-materials include: Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, New Zealand, Norway, South Africa, Sweden, UK • But, not all countries (notably USA) and in UK the legislation supports voluntary deposit, with restrictions of mode of access 31
  32. 32. 32
  33. 33. 33
  34. 34. System Architecture 34
  35. 35. Piloting an E-journals Preservation Registry Service (PEPRS) JISC-funded project, EDINA & ISSN-IC as partners E-J Preservation Registry Service E-Journal METADATA Preservation on preservation actions Registry METADATA on extant e-journals
  36. 36. Piloting an E-journals Preservation Registry Service E-J Preservation Registry Service E-Journal METADATA Preservation on preservation action Registry (b) KEY DATA: (a) Serial Title-level (a) •Title+ISSN; Pub.; related •Extent issued in digital? METADATA KEY DATA: (b) on extant e-journals Agency Status Serial Title-level, ISSN? •Policies eg on access Data dependency •Extent preserved
  37. 37. Piloting an E-journals Preservation SERVICES: user requirements Registry Service (c) E-J Preservation Registry Service E-Journal METADATA Preservation on preservation action Registry (b) (a) METADATA on extant e-journals
  38. 38. Piloting an E-journals Preservation Registry Service E-J Preservation Registry Service E-Journal METADATA Preservation on preservation action Registry (b) (a) METADATA on extant e-journals Data dependency ISSN Register
  39. 39. Piloting an E-journals Preservation Registry Service E-J Preservation Registry Service E-Journal METADATA Preservation on preservation action Registry (b) (a) METADATA Digital Preservation Agencies e.g. CLOCKSS, Portico; BL, KB; on extant e-journals UK LOCKSS Alliance etc. Data dependency ISSN Register
  40. 40. Abstract Data Model: Figure 1 in reference paper in Serials, March 2009 SERVICES: user requirements E-J Preservation Registry Service Piloting an E-journals E-Journal METADATA Preservation Preservation on preservation action Registry (b) Registry Service (a) METADATA Digital Preservation Agencies e.g. CLOCKSS, Portico; BL, KB; on extant e-journals UK LOCKSS Alliance etc. Data dependency ISSN Register
  41. 41. 6. Project Progress & Achievements • Data implementation model for Project • Screenshots from ‘working’ Prototype • Liaison with Archiving Agencies – sample data & data fields • (Presentations & publications) 41
  42. 42. Data Model for Prototype & Working Demonstrator: (1) obtain subsets of data from ISSN Register and from Preservation Agencies; (2) set up secure system for project purposes; (3) develop prototype / demonstrator Pilot of E-J Preserv Registry Service Project E-Journal Preservation action metadata Preservation Piloting an Registry E-journals Preservation Registry Service E-J metadata Digital Preservation Agencies e.g. CLOCKSS, Portico; BL, KB; UK LOCKSS Alliance etc. ISSN Register
  43. 43. This is a ‘Prototype’ – being shared by project partners, and may be shown to project associates & the funders (JISC): this shows the Basic Search
  44. 44. Success! This shows who is looking after this e-journal This is a ‘mock-up’ based on sample data from the archiving agencies, and using ‘first-cut’ fields
  45. 45. What happens when the ISSN entered is a print ISSN
  46. 46. Example of a search that reports no known preservation activity for an this e-journal
  47. 47. ISSN MARC 21 fields ISSN Data 001 Control Number (Internal) ISSN Data 008 Fixed-Length Data Elements inc. country code ISSN Data 022 International Standard Serial Number (ISSN & ISSN-L) ISSN Data 007 Medium of publication ISSN Data 222 Key Title ISSN Data 210 Abbreviated Title ISSN Data 245 Title proper ISSN Data 246 Varying Form of Title ISSN Data 710 Added Entry - Corporate Name ISSN Data 260 Publication, Distribution, etc. (Imprint) ISSN Data 362 Dates of Publication and/or Sequential Designation ISSN Data 776 Additional Physical Form Entry ISSN Data 780 Preceding Entry ISSN Data 785 Successor Title 47
  48. 48. Possible Agency fields Agency Archiving Agency Agency e-ISSN Agency Print-ISSN Agency Title Agency Publisher Agency Preservation Status Agency Holdings (Volume, Issue) Agency Start Date of Committed Titles Agency End Date of Committed Titles Agency Start Date of Processed Titles Agency End Date of Processed Titles 48
  49. 49. Thoughts and action .. Still early days: • Use E-Journals Register, sourced from ISSN Register – Over 66,000 e-serials now have ISSN • Need to agree what users want to know – descriptors of digital preservation policy & practices • Use network interoperability (to search or to harvest) – for up-to-date, reliable information held by preservation agencies on and statements about policies and coverage • ‘Titles’ is easy, but ‘Holdings’ is difficult! – role for DOI and Onix for Serials? • Ensure that e-journals you care about get an ISSN identifier! – The Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) requires it 49
  50. 50. Questions, Questions, Questions …. • What to do about e-serial content that is being preserved where the ISSN has not been assigned? • How/whether to include print journals with content that are digitised retrospectively? * some of which may have a print ISSN but many will not • How to collect, record and display ‘holdings’ information? – The extent preserved: years?, issues? Articles??? • How to be an international registry, and will that scale? • If attention is switching from preservation to post-cancellation access, should PEPRS try to adapt? – But that is for a national registry (PeCAN Project) – A national not an international responsibility 50
  51. 51. ISSN-IC looking at assignment workflow • As part of PEPRS project, ISSN-IC has drafted a workflow. An example might be: 1. Discover ‘new’ (unassigned) e-serial from a digital preservation agency – Establish ISSN eligibility and ISSN jurisdiction for that publication 2. Temporary use of identifier local to PEPRS 3. ISSN-IC work with National ISSN Centre * according to pre-agreed schedule 4. E-serial becomes included in ISSN Register 5. Metadata and ‘pointer’ in e-journals preservations registry service updated 6. Happiness! 51
  52. 52. Project developments • Interaction with Preservation Agencies – Blogging workshop for all Project participants. Seek views on data flows, data fields, vocabularies etc. • Development of demonstrator, to support pilot activity Planned for autumn/winter 2009 • Assessment of future of pilot, and future funding Scheduled for February 2010 52
  53. 53. Project Update at Project Website http://edina.ac.uk/projects/peprs/index.html 53
  54. 54. Shows what happens when the ISSN entered is not recognised