Morse "Open Discovery Initiative"
Download as PPTX, PDF0 likes207 views
The Open Discovery Initiative (ODI) seeks to enhance library discovery services by defining standards for content provider participation and establishing fair linking practices between discovery services and publishers. Key goals include streamlining collaboration between content and discovery providers, and improving user access to resources. The initiative also emphasizes the importance of transparent usage statistics to increase partner retention and user satisfaction.
Morse "Open Discovery Initiative"
- 1. Open Discovery Initiative (ODI) NISO Annual Meeting – ALA Annual June 22, 2019 Laura Morse Co-chair, NISO ODI Standing Committee Director, Library Systems & Support Harvard University
- 2. Background • Emergence of Library Discovery Service solutions • Agreements between content providers and discovery providers were ad-hoc, not representative of all content, and opaque to customers. 2
- 3. Goals of Open Discovery Initiative • Define ways for libraries to assess the level of content provider participation and for discovery services to affirm how they use that content • 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 3
- 4. Recommended Practice • A technical recommendation for data exchange including data formats, method of delivery, usage reporting, frequency of updates and rights of use • A way for libraries to assess content providers’ participation in discovery services • A model by which content providers work with discovery service vendors via fair and unbiased indexing and linking 4
- 5. ODI Standing Committee 2014-today • To promote educational opportunities about adoption of these recommended practices • To provide support for content providers and discovery providers during adoption • To provide a forum for ongoing discussion related to all aspects of discovery platforms for all stakeholders (content providers, discovery providers, libraries) • To determine timing for next steps for ongoing work 5
- 6. ODI Standing Committee Roster Libraries Publishers Service Providers 6 Marshall Breeding, Independent Consultant Noah Brubaker, PALNI Teresa Hazen, University of Arizona Libraries Geoff Morse, Northwestern University Laura Morse, Harvard University Ken Varnum, University of Michigan Bobbi Patham, Springer Nature Don Sechler, Clarivate Analytics Maria Stanton, ATLA Julie Zhu, IEEE Scott Bernier, EBSCO Information Services Rachel Kessler, Ex Libris/ProQuest Jay Holloway, OCLC
- 7. Value Propositions – Libraries/Users • Ease of Use. Finding relevant content is simpler when more resources are indexed on one platform. • Product Understanding. ODI vendor compliance makes it easier to understand which resources are included in discovery services and assess their impact.
- 8. Value Propositions – Content Providers • Increased use. Participation in discovery services makes content more valuable and discoverable, thus, increasing usage and decreasing the likelihood of cancellations. • Reduced technical barriers. Simplified the data transfer process. • Confirmed value of participation. Discovery services are encouraged to provide usage statistics that enable better decision making.
- 9. • Customer Satisfaction. Transparency in what content is included in the system and statistics confirming use will increase customer retention. • Partner Retention. Transparency in how providers contents is exposed in the system and statistics confirming use will increase partner retention. Value Propositions – Discovery Providers
- 10. Recent Initiatives – New Flyer • Highlighting all the ways that the NISO Open Discovery Initiative provides support to all stakeholders. • Please help us spread the word about ODI by sharing with your colleagues! https://groups.niso.org/apps/group_public/downloa d.php/21889/NISO_ODI_Brochure_2019.pdf 10
- 11. Recent Initiatives – ODI Report • The ODI Recommended Practice (RP-19-2014) defined a future work item to re-evaluate the needs of Abstracting & Indexing (A&I) services in web scale discovery systems – 2017: survey of 22 A&I providers to better understand their hesitations toward participating in discovery – 2018: survey of discovery service providers to better understand if and how the issues raised in the A&I provider survey were being addressed 11
- 12. Recent Initiatives – Report Conclusions • Significant amount of progress has been made in addressing the concerns of A&I providers • Efforts have been made by DSPs to: – limit access to subscribed A&I content to authenticated users – to brand A&I content within discovery results – to display unmerged branded A&I records – to link directly to A&I content from discovery interfaces 12
- 13. Recent Initiatives – Report Conclusions • That said, there are certain areas in need of the attention of librarians, A&I content providers, and discovery service providers including: – a lack of clarity on how well DSPs use the controlled vocabulary from A&Is; – problematic DSP usage statistics (in some cases all versions of a specific record are credited with use if just one has been clicked on by a user) – the branding of records in DSPs, which usually happens in the full or detailed record but not in the initial results list 13
- 14. Recent Initiatives – ODI Report • This report will be used to inform the RP Revisions • Need for both DSPs and librarians to assure A&I providers that systems will be configured so that the value of A&I metadata is recognized and leveraged for the benefit of the library user. • Full Report: https://groups.niso.org/apps/group_public/download.p hp/21877/NISO_ODI_Survey_Report_A&I_DSP_June201 9.pdf 14
- 15. Recommended Practice Revisions • Updating the Recommended Practice to ensure it addresses needs and responsibilities for all stakeholders in line with current technologies and library trends 15
- 16. Recommended Practice Revisions • Library Responsibilities in ODI • Handling of Open Access Content Including Hybrid OA Content • More Meaningful Usage Statistics for Content Providers • Fair Linking • Identifying the Source of the Record in the Discovery Interface • Content Coverage Disclosure (Reporting on Discovery Service Content at a Collection Level) • Identification of Additional Metadata and Content Elements 16
- 17. Recommended Practice Revisions • Work Item Proposal https://bit.ly/2AV9IwU • Timeline https://bit.ly/2FRzhCl 17
- 18. Recommended Practice Revisions • We need your help! • Content Provider Survey - https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/odi- contentprovider • Discovery Provider Survey - https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/odi- discoveryprovider • Library Survey - https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/odi-library 18
- 19. Resources for CPs and DSPs • Content Provider FAQ http://www.niso.org/workrooms/odi/content_provider_faq/ • Implementation guide https://bit.ly/2Wblk7W • Conformance Checklist Templates & Statements – Goal is transparency, not perfection! http://www.niso.org/workrooms/odi/conformance/ http://www.niso.org/workrooms/odi/conformance_statemen ts/
- 20. Resources for Librarians • FAQ and talking points http://www.niso.org/workrooms/odi/library_talking _points/
- 21. General Resources • Website https://www.niso.org/standards-committees/odi Mailing list http://www.niso.org/lists/opendiscovery/ • ODI Updates http://www.niso.org/workrooms/odi/updates/ • Twitter https://twitter.com/NISO_ODI
Editor's Notes
- #3: Based on index of a wide range of content Commercial and open access Primary journal literature, ebooks, and more ODI WG launched after ALA 2011. Created a recommended practice
- #4: From Library perspective: Web-scale discovery systems are increasingly important to the work of libraries in service of their users. As these discovery systems become more complex, librarians are less able to understand or explain to their users what content is included or how. The Open Discovery Initiative's recommended practice represents a significant opportunity to understand what is indexed, where it comes from, and how it is used. Increasing need to ensure that the coverage meets our needs.
- #5: June 2014
- #11: Julie Zhu lead this initiative, based on her learning experience in working on ODI and with optimizing IEEE content discovery across discovery vendors. She wanted to share this set of practical knowledge with other content providers.
- #12: Library Survey Four years have passed since the release of the ODI Recommended Practice, and in that time concerns surrounding discovery services have shifted. The Standing Committee decided to survey libraries to better understand current issues and how effective ODI efforts have been thus far. It is clear that there is still a need to build transparency on issues surrounding the content within discovery service central indexes. However, ODI needs to better promote itself in order to increase its impact
- #13: Library Survey Four years have passed since the release of the ODI Recommended Practice, and in that time concerns surrounding discovery services have shifted. The Standing Committee decided to survey libraries to better understand current issues and how effective ODI efforts have been thus far. It is clear that there is still a need to build transparency on issues surrounding the content within discovery service central indexes. However, ODI needs to better promote itself in order to increase its impact
- #14: Library Survey Four years have passed since the release of the ODI Recommended Practice, and in that time concerns surrounding discovery services have shifted. The Standing Committee decided to survey libraries to better understand current issues and how effective ODI efforts have been thus far. It is clear that there is still a need to build transparency on issues surrounding the content within discovery service central indexes. However, ODI needs to better promote itself in order to increase its impact
- #15: Library Survey Four years have passed since the release of the ODI Recommended Practice, and in that time concerns surrounding discovery services have shifted. The Standing Committee decided to survey libraries to better understand current issues and how effective ODI efforts have been thus far. It is clear that there is still a need to build transparency on issues surrounding the content within discovery service central indexes. However, ODI needs to better promote itself in order to increase its impact
- #16: Talk about process of creating list of potential revisions items and then voting upon them to prioritize the highest set of items.
- #17: Top 7 priorities were voted by the group. A subgroup has been formed to complete information gathering and drafting of proposal revisions for each of the following areas.
- #18: More details about the scope of the RP revisions can be found in the worktime proposal. The schedule for our work is to have a revision document ready by January 2020. Timeline includes more information about the phases of work.