06. Publish grey literature data

The supply under open license of bibliographic records describing institutional grey literature.

Description

Activity - The supply under open license of bibliographic records describing institutional grey literature.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Actors - Library, academic authors of grey literature, repository managers elsewhere in institution
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Data involved - Bibliographic records describing institutional grey literature; may also involve full text of documents and associated research data.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Data flow - Data on grey literature collected from across the institution, typically in the context of an institutional repository.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Does this require Open Data - Not necessary, although explicit open licenses for set of metadata, full text and associated research data will make use and re-use easier.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Current Examples - University of Ghent, University of Southampton (ECS)
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Benefits

Institution - (1) Improved learning and research experience; (2) Marketing, through visibility of institutional outputs
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Library Service - (1) Improved service to users; (2) Increased visibility to key stakeholders inside the institution
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Researchers - Potential to increase visibility of institutional holdings and to amplify own research
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Students - Potential to increase visibility of institutional holdings
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Replication - This approach applies to a wide range of teaching, learning and research outputs that may have little or no visibility through current discovery interfaces
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Case for not doing it - Too difficult to be comprehensive, opening up an open-ended commitment
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Motivation

Principles - Raise internal and external visibility of institutional resources not formally published elsewhere.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Costs - Delivers value to the institution by increasing visibility of expensively created institutional resources.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Services - Enhances mission of institutional repositories
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Rationale for not doing it - Diverts the attention from more pressing concerns, in repositories and contributing researcher groups
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Consequences of doing it as Open Data

What will happen? - (1) Institutional researchers will be able to increase visibility of their work; (2) Colleagues and students will have access to material not available by other means.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Potential Risks - (1) Loss of control over institutional data; (2) The originator of elements of the bibliographic records challenges release as open data [see also UC1, UC2, UC3, UC4, UC5, UC7, UC15, UC16, UC17]; (3) Increased visibility of collection leads to demand beyond local resources ability to supply [see also UC3, UC4, UC5, UC7, UC9, UC13, UC16, UC17]; (4) If ‘full–text’ items are included in the data, there is a risk that any publishers of the material may challenge the release as open data.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Potential Opportunities - (1) Development of innovative / compelling third party services based on open data; (2) Increased use of collection by internal and external users through improved discovery services [see also UC3, UC4, UC5, UC7, UC9, UC13, UC16, UC17]
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Consequences of not doing it? - Grey literature is by definition harder to discover through convention discovery routes, and is likely to be under untilised if not adequately exposed to discovery services.
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Rights and Licensing Issues

Rights and licensing issues - Some grey literature comprises eprints and preprints for material published elsewhere; there is the potential for inadvertently contravening licenses and publishing agreements. Some grey literature comprises early results and analysis from research; there is the potential to dilute the impact of later publications, or to release contradictory results.
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Practicalities

Data exchange formatting - Dublin Core, for dissemination via an OAI repository?
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Lifecycle implications - Modest; infrastructure to support an institutional OAI repository.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Hosting requirements - Relatively minor
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Existing systems impact - There is an ongoing requirement to encourage deposition and use.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Skills demands - Configuring an OAI repository is relatively straightforward. Evangelising deposition into the repository is a harder and more of a long term task.
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Costs

Setup - OAI repository software is relatively robust, and there are a number of products from which to choose. Configuration to meet specific requirements may require modest effort that will normally be within the abilities of systems staff.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Ongoing - The infrastructural costs associated with sustaining this capability should be relatively low. The human cost of encouraging deposition and use is more significant.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Cost of doing nothing - No additional costs will be directly accrued through inaction. However, as more institutions set up systems to promote their activities, those without a strategic approach to dissemination of grey literature may well begin to appear less active.
Part of use case: | Share your experience

12. Supply data for Crowd Sourced Cataloguing

The supply of bibliographic data to volunteers for the purpose of improving and enhancing records.

Description

Activity - The supply of bibliographic data to volunteers for the purpose of improving and enhancing records; this may also involve the creation of new records. Such activity may be directed (e.g. volunteers being requested to focus on specific fields, or to add new records for a specified collection) or it may be opportunistic (i.e. volunteers invited to edit and add as and when they see fit). This Use Case assumes this is being undertaken to benefit the initiating catalogue(s), though the resulting records will be designated as open data and therefore be available for wider use. It will not necessarily involve a third party coordinating organization, though there are attractions in terms of process, quality and web-scale critical mass in such services.

Services in which the collaborators are restricted to libraries (or other professional organizations) are similar in terms of open data but significantly different in other respects (see UC11).
This use case differs from UC11 because it is based on the opening up the cataloguing process itself whereas UC11 is about open data benefits in a closed cataloguing collaboration.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Actors - Libraries; individuals and organisations that wish to make a contribution; optionally third party coordinating services
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Data involved - Most likely full (but possibly partial) bibliographic records
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Data flow - Depending on the software available, the methods of version control, the activity may take place within the catalogue or outside the catalogue (both cases using a browser-based application) or it may involve the supply of records (directly to volunteers or through open access). Providing open access to the resulting ‘crowd sourced’ records may best be treated as a separate process, especially if there is an interim QA step.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Does this require Open Data - If the records are supplied under an open data license, the scope for exploitation will be unambiguous and the incentive for improvement will be greater.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Current Examples - Biblios.net, Open Library
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Benefits

Institution - None other than upholding the principle of enhancing scholarship through improved discovery and description.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Library Service - Potential for improved discovery and access, resulting in better use of the collection
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Researchers - Improved discovery, especially in disciplines (e.g. humanities) where historic and grey materials are poorly described, if at all.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Students - Students may be less dependent on extensive description than researchers, though they could benefit from other aspects of metadata (such as enhanced links to courses or contemporary subject keywords)
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Replication - Release for cataloguing (whether directed or opportunistic) requires logistical considerations above and beyond more general release, though the licensing may be the same. The logistical process may however be organized as a variation of UC11, though UC11 is collaborative and therefore cannot take place within a single ‘home’ catalogue.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Case for not doing it - The unpredictable costs of coordination and quality control may be judged to outweigh benefits, which might alternatively be accrued through collaborative cataloguing (see UC11)
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Motivation

Principles - Well-populated, high quality finding aids are highly desirable. The effort to improve them is costly and the domain knowledge is likely to be scattered. A distributed and open volunteer approach may therefore be advantageous, especially as the metadata does not itself confer competitive advantage.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Costs - There are significant potential savings in cataloguing time, though this should be weighed against the overhead of coordination and quality assurance.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Services - Improved services may result from better metadata and new services may result from wider description of the collection (assuming some libraries have significant resources incompletely described). Open data offers the freedom to pursue those opportunities.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Rationale for not doing it - Issues of quality and authority are not insignificant and need to be faced head on.
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Consequences of doing it as Open Data

What will happen? - Unpredictably paced, variable quality records will require processing, the challenges of which can be addressed through a more directive approach to community engagement (see the community science work of Galaxy Zoo).
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Potential Risks - (1) Loss of control over institutional data; (2) Reduction in the quality and authority of catalogue records; (3) effort and resource required to make use of crowd source data outweighs benefits;
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Potential Opportunities - (1) Development of innovative / compelling third party services based on open data ; (2) Links with a broader engagement with User Generated Content linked to bib records, involving such as tagging, ratings, and reviews.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Consequences of not doing it? - The sector needs to find some way of reducing the cost of cataloguing whilst addressing the growth in publication (i.e. of things to be catalogued). This is one option.
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Rights and Licensing Issues

Rights and licensing issues - In keeping with the principles behind this act, the license should be explicit and as open and unencumbered as possible in order to facilitate genuine reuse. See the general guidance on Licensing Issues for further detail
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Practicalities

Data exchange formatting - For editing, a web interface seems preferable. If a dataset is to be released for editing, it may be wise to release a standard set of attributes (not a full MARC record) in a format that can be handled by the user (e.g. CSV, XML). The availability of the resulting records as open data (in a range of formats) is best handled as a separate issue.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Lifecycle implications - The lifecycle of such efforts is potentially complex. Planning of the synchronization and release of the outputs is especially important.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Hosting requirements - The data to be edited may need hosting as a download or a separate catalogue instance. The resulting published data will need to be accessible for download.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Existing systems impact - The LMS will not necessarily support the logistics of this approach, though MARC export and import options (for example) may be sufficiently flexible.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Skills demands - Subject to the capabilities of the LMS, this will fall within the capabilities of a systems librarian. Depending on the approach, a cataloguing website may also be required which will need careful workflow engineering.
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Costs

Setup - The simplest implementation may be achieved using MARC export and import software, which should be part of the local LMS.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Ongoing - The resource implications of managing the operational process must be addressed.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Cost of doing nothing - No extra direct costs will be incurred by not doing it.
Part of use case: | Share your experience

13. Supply data to be enhanced for own use

Supply copies of the library’s data in return for access to enriched metadata.

Description

Activity - The structured nature of library data makes it eminently suitable for automated enrichment in a variety of ways, from identifying alternative versions of a particular work (paperback, hardback, e-book, etc) to adding associated content such as book jacket images, tables of contents, and reviews. Where such enrichment is maintained by third parties, it is often easiest to supply those third parties with copies of the library’s data (even if just an ISBN list) in return for access to the enrichments.
This use case differs from UC12 because it is about exploitation of catalogue data by users without a return path to the library whereas UC12 is about a process intended to benefit the catalogues.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Actors - Libraries, external services
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Data involved - It depends which enrichments are being sought, but typically some subset of the bibliographic record
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Data flow - Bibliographic data are supplied to the external service for matching and enrichment. Records containing the enhancements (or, perhaps, just links to those enhancements on a third party site) are then transferred back to the library. If it is an area of concern, libraries should ensure that they understand whether or not the external service will keep a copy of the original data.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Does this require Open Data - There is no requirement for Open Data. Indeed, mingling of creative works (subjective reviews, book jackets), commercially licensed data (such as Table of Contents) and Open bibliographic data may have the potential to complicate downstream reuse by all parties.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Current Examples - LibraryThing covers service
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Benefits

Institution - More compelling, engaging, competitive library services
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Library Service - (1) More compelling, engaging, competitive library services; (2) xISBN-type services may increase utilization of stock (e.g. directing those who searched for an unheld monograph to the available ebook version)
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Researchers - Table of Contents has some value; however, it is not clear that such as reviews have anything other than cosmetic value in this context.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Students - Table of Contents has some value; such enhancements as reviews may have greater value in this context.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Replication - High: Third party service providers have a requirement to make the iterative process as quick, easy and painless as possible.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Case for not doing it - Recurring cost.
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Motivation

Principles - Creation of more completely described and more compelling library resources
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Costs - Cost benefits may arise subject to the service engaged, which may be free or a value added part of a broader subscription or membership arrangement
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Services - Principally a richer and stickier OPAC
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Rationale for not doing it - None, other than an ongoing cost for access to the enrichment data and the resources to load it
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Consequences of doing it as Open Data

What will happen? - Library systems supporting the enrichments will be more engaging, and possibly more informative.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Potential Risks - (1) Loss of control over institutional data; (2) It will be too difficult to incorporate enrichments into existing systems; (3) Third party providers of enrichments will become scarce; (4) Third party providers of enrichments will not be sufficiently rigorous, leading to false matches; (5) Increased visibility of collection leads to demand beyond local resources ability to supply [see also UC3, UC4, UC5, UC6, UC7, UC9, UC16, UC17].
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Potential Opportunities - (1) Development of innovative / compelling third party services based on open data; (2) Increased use of library collection by internal and external users through improved discovery services [see also UC3, UC4, UC5, UC6, UC7, UC9, UC16, UC17].
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Consequences of not doing it? - Possible decline in use arising from preference for alternative services such as Amazon or Google Book Search, which provide richer search experience and more engaging UI.
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Rights and Licensing Issues

Rights and licensing issues - This is likely to involve an external organization and therefore the following considerations should be actively addressed ahead of selecting the service. (1) Does the institution own the enrichments in perpetuity (i.e. What happens when it stops paying if this is part of a subscription service?); (2) Does the external provider have any continuing right to hold or use data supplied to them by the library for enrichment? (3) Where can content be used? e.g. Book jacket image use within VLE? (4) What is the impact of integrating additional data with existing records, and how does this affect the rights relating to both individual database items, and the overall database.
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Practicalities

Data exchange formatting - This will depend on the service engaged.
  • Model 1: Supply of a list of identifiers (e.g. ISSN, ISBN, OCLC Number) as simple text.
  • Model 2: Supply of one or more identifiers on a ‘just-in-time’ basis to an API, which returns enhanced data such as book cover or ToC.
  • Model 3: Supply of ‘stub’ (very short) records in MARC, or other format to be enhanced.
  • Model 4: Supply of MARC records to third party platform, where records and additional enhancements are hosted.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Lifecycle implications - Model 2 has no implications. However, Models 1, 3 & 4 require regular supply of updated records, either by full export or changes (additions, updates and deletions) based on the original export.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Hosting requirements -
  • Models 1 & 2: Typically very low. In many cases, book jacket images are not even hosted on institutional servers.
  • Model 2: Small amount of local hosting required for ‘stub’ records.
  • Model 3: Hosting provided by 3rd party.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Existing systems impact - Models 3 and 4 have no significant impact. However, Model 2 is likely to require addition of HTML or Javascript to local record display. In some cases this is not possible within an LMS OPAC, although might be achieved through additional frameworks such as Juice (http://code.google.com/p/juice-project/).
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Skills demands - Integration of enrichments into OPACs and other systems may be more or less challenging, depending upon the system being used. Subject to LMS support of export of identifiers or partial or full MARC records based on specified criteria, the requirements of Models 1, 3 & 4 should fall within the capabilities of a systems librarian.
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Costs

Setup - The necessary export capability should already be included within the LMS or equivalent local systems. Configuration to meet specific requirements may require modest effort that will normally be within the abilities of systems staff. Access to third party data will typically involve signing a contract or license agreement, as well as either a one-off payment or commitment to an ongoing subscription.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Ongoing - Access to third party data may involve commitment to an ongoing subscription.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Cost of doing nothing - No additional costs will be directly accrued through inaction. However, failure to innovate in this area may result in existing systems becoming increasingly dated in appearance and capability. This may lead to a decline in use within the institution, as potential users look elsewhere.
Part of use case: | Share your experience

15. Allow personal use of data for Reference Management

The supply of bibliographic data under an open license to be used by library members (and other users) in reference management software.

Description

Activity - The supply of bibliographic data to be used by library members (and other users) in reference management software (e.g. using Zotero or EndNote).
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Actors - Libraries; Suppliers of bibliographic data to libraries; Library members/users.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Data involved - Bibliographic records.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Data flow - Bibliographic data are made available either through standard interfaces or as downloadable files of selected records in appropriate formats.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Does this require Open Data - Data made available by the library for these purposes needs to be open to the extent that a third-party can take, store and reuse the data.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Current Examples - The vast majority of University and Research Library catalogues already offer this functionality (e.g. COPAC http://copac.ac.uk/faq/#import) though not typically under an open license.
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Benefits

Institution - Improved management of bibliographic data throughout research, teaching and learning processes.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Library Service - Enhanced service to users, and possible benefits resulting from increased accuracy of citations in circulation within the institution (e.g. on reading lists).
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Researchers - Time saved in managing references and creating citations and bibliographies.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Students - Time saved in managing references and creating citations and bibliographies.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Replication - High, as this is regarded as relatively standard functionality for the library systems used in HE and Research Libraries.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Case for not doing it - Concern that providing records for reference management software may be in breach of agreements with those supplying bibliographic records to the library.
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Motivation

Principles - Support for the academic workflow
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Costs - There may be a cost benefit to the institution by reducing the need for researchers and students to re-key bibliographic information which offers both an immediate time saving and improved accuracy and efficiency in the general management of references and citations.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Rationale for not doing it - Uncertainty as to the legal status of the data
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Consequences of doing it as Open Data

What will happen? - Members of the library, and other users of the library catalogue, will be able to download records into personal reference management software, and other software that can make use of structured bibliographic data.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Potential Risks - (1) Loss of control over institutional data; (2) The originator of elements of the bibliographic records challenges release as open data [see also UC1, UC2, UC3, UC4, UC5, UC6, UC7, UC16, UC17]
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Potential Opportunities - (1) Development of innovative / compelling third party services based on open data; (2) Creation of a distributed rich network of bibliographic data; (3) Third–party tools (LibraryThing, Mendeley) get better and better, as they gain more data and more users – and as those users largely originate inside Universities, the institutions also benefit, although in ways that may be difficult to quantify [see also UC1, UC2];
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Consequences of not doing it? - Library seen as failing to supply basic service which is generally available in all HE and Research Library catalogues.
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Rights and Licensing Issues

Rights and licensing issues - The JISC Legal resource “Transfer and Use of Bibliographic Records” (http://www.jisclegal.ac.uk/Projects/ TransferandUseofBibliographicRecords.aspx) differentiates between ‘Make available’ and ‘Use’. If records are provided to users who are not library members, this is seen as a ‘Make available’ activity, with associated issues outlined by the guide. Agreements with suppliers of bibliographic data to the library should be checked to ensure they allow this use, and under what restrictions. For the library associating rights and licenses with the records being downloaded by individuals, clearly any licenses should allow reuse in a wide variety of contexts, which must include some level of re-publication of the information contained in the records to allow use of the resulting references and citations in published work.
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Practicalities

Data exchange formatting - Reference management software is generally capable of importing bibliographic data in a variety of formats, including both open and proprietary standards. Common formats for downloading records and importing into Reference management software include MARC, RIS (http://www.refman.com/support/risformat_intro.asp) and BiBTeX (http://www.bibtex.org/). Some Reference Management software packages also support searching catalogues using the Z39.50 protocol and saving records directly.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Lifecycle implications - None
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Hosting requirements - None
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Existing systems impact - In the unlikely event of the existing system not supporting appropriate download formats for end users, this would need to be added. However, it may be that formats need amending to work with specific packages, or new formats may need adding to support specific packages. Again Z39.50 is widely supported in Library management systems, although some configuration may be required.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Skills demands - Configuration of the library system to offer appropriate download and/or Z39.50 access should fall within the capabilities of a systems librarian.
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Costs

Setup - If Z39.50 access is desired, there may be licensing costs associated with enabling this on the library management system, depending on expected level of use and whether Z39.50 is already enabled on the system. There may be some costs associated with staff time spent on the appropriate configuration of the library system.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Ongoing - There may be some costs associated with staff time spent on providing support to users of the service. There may also be recurrent costs associated with providing Z39.50 access to the library catalogue.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Cost of doing nothing - No additional costs will be directly accrued through inaction.
Part of use case: | Share your experience

16. Publish data for lightweight application development

Publishing library data under an open license with the specific intention of encouraging third parties to develop applications and services using the data.

Description

Activity - Bibliographic data held by a library has the potential to deliver value far beyond the OPAC and the internal systems of the library itself. As an adjunct to course websites, as a driver for reading clubs, and as a source of reference data for bloggers, readers, and genre enthusiasts, authoritative bibliographic data deserves to be used in all manner of third party applications. These might be developed by or for a community, and might be free at the point of use, or incur a fee. In all cases the existing library OPAC remains freely available to all.
This use case differs from UC17 because it is about open-ended experimental community development possibilities whereas UC17 is about exploitation in a commercial development.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Actors - Libraries, Application Developers
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Data involved - Bibliographic records, possibly involving regularly refreshed holdings data or access to an API enabling live queries against holdings
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Data flow - A dump of basic bibliographic data, supplied to the developer or more widely to a potential developer community, and ideally periodically refreshed.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Does this require Open Data - Not necessary, but it would avoid the need for multiple developers and institutions to enter into formal contracts. Non- commercial licenses of various kinds would explicitly prevent this entrepreneurialism.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Current Examples - University of Huddersfield, Warwick public libraries
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Benefits

Institution - Something for nothing; ‘cool’ attitude; encouraging innovative engagement with scholarship
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Library Service - Something for nothing; ‘cool’ attitude; meeting a perceived requirement
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Researchers - Flexibility and choice in accessing institutional services
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Students - Flexibility and choice in accessing institutional services
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Replication - High
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Case for not doing it - Combination of reputational concerns and distraction from core mission
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Motivation

Principles - Choice, flexibility, free market, let a thousand flowers bloom. Just because the institution provides an OPAC, it doesn’t mean that all users will be most comfortable with that as their interface. Rather than devote effort to building alternative interfaces, why not expose the data and let those who are interested and motivated do it? Books need not always be central to the use case; much of the real value might actually be found in cases where bibliographic data simply offers a means of enriching or enhancing some other use.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Costs - Avoids the need for the institution to invest in alternative interfaces.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Services - By making data available in ways that users prefer, usage and satisfaction may rise.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Rationale for not doing it - Concerns about (1) user perception of any charge for use of the resulting application; (2) quality and updating of resulting apps, which that might reflect poorly upon the institution; (3) a third party profiting from institutional data. Furthermore providing data for these purposes is simply not core to the institutional mission.
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Consequences of doing it as Open Data

What will happen? - Staff and students will have the opportunity to access an existing library service in a different way.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Potential Risks - (1) Loss of control over institutional data; (2) Backlash against a charge for accessing freely available information (from local users and external observers) [see also UC17]; (3) Damage to institutional reputation through provision of substandard product by a third party [see also UC3, UC4, UC5, UC17]; (4) Popular product puts unsustainable strain on infrastructure (eg, by repeatedly polling holdings status inefficiently) [see also UC17]; (5) The originator of elements of the bibliographic records challenges release as open data [see also UC1, UC2, UC3, UC4, UC5, UC6, UC7, UC15, UC17]; (6) Increased visibility of collection leads to demand beyond ability to supply [see also UC3, UC4, UC5, UC6, UC7, UC9, UC13, UC17].
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Potential Opportunities - (1) Development of innovative / compelling third party services based on open data; (2) An ecosystem of enthusiastic developers emerges, keen and able to provide alternative means of accessing key institutional services via data dumps and APIs [see also UC1, UC2, UC17]; (3) Increased use of library collection by internal and external users through improved discovery services [see also UC3, UC4, UC5, UC6, UC7, UC9, UC13, UC17].
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Consequences of not doing it? - None that are significant
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Rights and Licensing Issues

Rights and licensing issues - Is this Open Data? If it is, the license should be explicit and as open and unencumbered as possible in order to facilitate genuine reuse. See the general guidance on Licensing Issues for further detail. If not, what is the relationship between institution and developer? Is it a single supply of a single data set for a single purpose to a single developer, under an explicit contract? Does the institution want some share of revenue? How does that affect licenses and contracts?
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Practicalities

Data exchange formatting - All models require engagement with likely third party developers to decide most appropriate record formats. Third party software developers are less likely to be familiar with MARC format, and may prefer MARC-XML or simpler representations. It is highly likely that at the least ‘availability’ data would be provided by API for which reference should be made to (1) good practice at http://blogs.ukoln.ac.uk/good-apis-jisc/ 2009/04/15/good-practice-for-apis/; (2) OpenSearch, DLF-ILS and DAIA specifications.
  • Model 1: Records exported from the LMS based on specified criteria transformed into one or more formats to make data as accessible to the interested parties. Additional exports on a regular basis representing either a full export or just changes (additions, updates and deletions) based on the original export.
  • Model 2: Provision of an appropriate API.
  • Model 3: A combination of data export and API.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Lifecycle implications -
  • Models 1 & 3: Regular supply of updated records, either by full export or changes (additions, updates and deletions) based on the original export.
  • Models 2 & 3: Continued running of API.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Hosting requirements - Depending on decisions regarding data exchange methods and formatting, either hosting for data files or an appropriate API platform is likely to be required.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Existing systems impact - There is potential impact upon existing systems if APIs are queried regularly.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Skills demands - (1) If data exchange is done solely via download of an initial data and periodic updates, subject to LMS support of conditional MARC export, this should fall within the capabilities of a systems librarian. (2) For provision of data via API, the skills required with depend on LMS (or other) support for appropriate APIs. Where APIs do not exist software development would be required. (3) There may also be third party skills issues involving requirement to transform data to generic formats and to support the developer in understanding library data and systems.
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Costs

Setup - The necessary export capability should already be included within the LMS or equivalent local systems. Configuration to meet specific requirements may require modest effort that will normally be within the abilities of systems staff.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Ongoing - The costs associated with sustaining this capability are low, but will inevitably be affected by the frequency with which data updates must be supplied.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Cost of doing nothing - No additional costs will be directly accrued through inaction. However, failure to innovate in this area may result in existing systems becoming increasingly dated in appearance and capability. This may lead to a decline in use within the institution, as potential users look elsewhere.
Part of use case: | Share your experience

02. Publish open Linked Data for unspecified use

Make data openly and freely available as Linked Data.

Description

Activity - A growing enthusiasm for open access and transparency has empowered some efforts to simply make data openly and freely available for unencumbered use by third parties. Government efforts in the USA, the UK and elsewhere provide clear examples of this trend, as do library-specific initiatives such as the Open Library. This is a variant of UC1 involving Linked Data.
This use case differs from UC1 because it is specifically about publication as Linked Data format whereas UC1 is about format neutral.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Actors - Libraries, which MAY require institutional buy-in and MAY have contractual and licensing implications with respect to suppliers, partners, etc.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Data involved - Potentially any library data, possibly combined (or linked) with other metadata (such as course titles). Typically records and fields (tags) for which the institution feels rights and licensing issues are sufficiently well understood.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Data flow - Data are placed online, either within the institution or via some third party such as the Talis Platform. Data may be periodically refreshed, and it would typically be the responsibility of any organisation consuming the data to check for any updates.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Does this require Open Data - There is no requirement for Open Data per se. However, if we presume that the rationale for publication is to ensure the widest possible dissemination then adoption of a generic open data license (see Rights and Licensing Issues) is the most effective way to make the set of potential uses unambiguous. Restrictive licenses are counter-productive, as is making the data available without some explicit statement regarding potential utilisation. Locally developed licenses and statements regarding use should be avoided where possible as, although perhaps open in spirit, these local variants complicate matters for those wishing to combine data from disparate sources.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Current Examples - Libris, National Széchényi Library, Freebase
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Benefits

Institution - (1) In line with institutional goals and mission with reference to disseminating knowledge, playing a role within the community, enabling innovation, etc; (2) Attracts publicity and status for first movers.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Library Service - (1) Creating the opportunity for third parties to develop local and wider services of value, some of which may potentially drive increased attention and traffic back to the library and its holdings; (2) Enables enrichment of library data from other Linked Data sources such as http:// id.loc.gov/ (includes Library of Congress Subject Headings as Linked Data), http://viaf.org (Virtual International Authority File available as Linked Data, documented at http://outgoing.typepad.com/outgoing/2010/05/viafs-new- linked-data.html), http://dbpedia.org (Linked Data representation of Wikipedia); (3) Can increase exposure of library collection to web search engines.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Researchers - (1) A building block in opening up access to large and unique collections of data; (2) potential for third party applications to become richer and more responsive to institutional collections, making those collections easier to access whilst also making the applications more useful.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Students - (1) The possibility of Google Scholar and other external services having greater knowledge of institutional holdings; (2) local discovery becomes easier and richer due to enhanced library data (from other Linked Data sources).
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Replication - Medium: Pioneers can document the necessary steps to extract data from various systems, and document decisions regarding transformation of bibliographic data into Linked Data. However, decisions made by one institution may not be immediately transferrable to others, and ‘best practice’ for representing bibliographic data as Linked Data is not yet established.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Case for not doing it - Uncertainty. Once data are released online under an open license, third parties are explicitly permitted to take and reuse those data as they see fit. Even if the institution initially responsible for releasing the data changes its policy and either withdraws the data or relicenses it with more stringent terms, anyone who downloaded the original release remains able to continue using and redistributing it in perpetuity.
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Motivation

Principles - The rationale is essentially philosophical. The institution or the library believes in the importance of openness, transparency and sharing, and is un-persuaded by arguments to preserve the status quo by keeping data private. Additionally the institution of the library believes that it is important to integrate library data into the fabric of the web, and that Linked Data is the best way of achieving this. For early adopters, publicity and status may play a not-insignificant part in the decision making process.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Costs - Cost benefit is unlikely to be a significant motivation for this approach, especially as this approach may require more effort than UC1. However, doing this may represent an opportunity cost in diverting attention from another priority.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Services - There is the possibility that a useful service may emerge from an external or internal party.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Rationale for not doing it - (1) Uncertainty as to the legal status of the data; (2) discomfort with not being able to take the data back once it’s released; (3) concern about how the data might be used, and how that might reflect upon the institution; (4) potential disruption to existing relationships, partnerships, and commercial arrangements; (5) simply insufficient reason to make it a priority.
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Consequences of doing it as Open Data

What will happen? - Library bibliographic data will be linked into the wider web of Linked Data.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Potential Risks - (1) Loss of control over institutional data; (2) The originator of elements of the bibliographic records challenges release as open data [see also UC1, UC3, UC4, UC5, UC6, UC7, UC15, UC16, UC17]; (3) Loss of future revenue [see also UC1]; (4) While there is currently some momentum behind the Linked Data movement, many of the expected benefits remain, to a large extent, unproven, and some commentators believe that the approach is too complex to gain widespread adoption.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Potential Opportunities - (1) Development of innovative / compelling third party services based on open data; (2) An ecosystem of enthusiastic developers emerges, keen and able to provide alternative means of accessing key institutional services using Linked Data representations [see also UC1, UC16, UC17]; (3) Third–party tools (LibraryThing, Mendeley) get better and better, as they gain more data and more users – and as those users largely originate inside Universities, the institutions also benefit, although in ways that may be difficult to quantify [see also UC1, UC15]; (4) Large pools of data create opportunities for the creation of regional, national and international services to drive stock management, etc.; [see also UC1] (5) Bibliographic data becomes searchable via semantic web technologies; (6) Libraries establish position as key players in the Linked Data/web of data space; (7) Libraries benefit from other Linked Data sources providing richer metadata and related exploration of the collections.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Consequences of not doing it? - (1) Libraries seen at odds with moves to Open Data in the public sector; (2) Libraries become sidelined as metadata experts and providers as others expose data on the web.
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Rights and Licensing Issues

Rights and licensing issues - In keeping with the principles behind this act, the license should be explicit and as open and unencumbered as possible in order to facilitate genuine reuse. See the general guidance on Licensing Issues for further detail.
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Practicalities

Data exchange formatting - Data transformed from MARC or local storage format to RDF, which is then serialised in a number of ways (e.g. N3, XML, JSON). Most commonly this would then be exposed via a triple store with a SPARQL endpoint, and via a RESTful web interface which would usually provide both human readable versions of the data (i.e. html pages) as well as machine-parsable data (i.e. RDF).

Key to this process will be choosing appropriate ontologies to represent the data. While there is some previous practice in this area, (see http:// dcpapers.dublincore.org/ojs/pubs/article/viewArticle/927), it is probably too early to see this as ‘best practice’ for representing bibliographic data as Linked Data. Common vocabularies used in current implementations are:

As libraries tend to hold information on non-bibliographic resources as well (e.g. audio-visual material), it may be necessary to represent these using more appropriate vocabularies (e.g. http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/RDF for recorded music).

A W3C ‘incubator group’ for Library Linked Data which is currently (May 2010 – May 2011) investigating “how existing building blocks of librarianship, such as metadata models, metadata schemas, standards and protocols for building interoperability and library systems and networked environments, encourage libraries to bring their content, and generally re-orient their approaches to data interoperability towards the Web” (http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/)
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Lifecycle implications - Examples to date have merged the human-readable web interface to the library catalogue (OPAC) and the machine-readable RDF, with the implication that this is an up to date representation of the library catalogue, possibly refreshed daily or even more frequently.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Hosting requirements - There are a variety of options, but the minimum would be space to store the RDF representation of the data, and a web server to serve data on request. However, when publishing this type of data it is becoming common to provide a SPARQL endpoint as well as a web interface, which further suggests the use of a triple store to host the data. An alternative approach is to outsource hosting to a third party, such as the Talis Platform.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Existing systems impact - It is currently unlikely that existing systems will support publication of bibliographic data as Linked Data. It would be necessary to create the relevant routines to extract data from existing systems, transform into RDF, and publish either directly onto the web, or via a triple store.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Skills demands - There is likely to be a steep learning curve for those engaging in the publication of bibliographic data as Linked Data. An understanding of both bibliographic data in traditional formats (e.g. MARC) and RDF will be required, which is likely to mean a high degree of collaboration between library staff and technical staff. A good understanding of http, configuration of web servers, and possibly triple store technology will be required, which implies a high level of technical expertise.
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Costs

Setup - While much of the software needed to publish Linked Data is Open Source, the time needed to gain the necessary expertise and setup the necessary infrastructure could be significant. In the short-term, outsourcing the provision of the necessary infrastructure could prove more cost effective.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Ongoing - Once the investment in the initial setup has been done, the costs associated with sustaining this capability are likely to be low. If the activity has been outsourced there are likely to be higher ongoing costs in the medium to long-term. However, it should be noted that as the sector understanding of representing bibliographic data as Linked Data changes, it may be that earlier adopters will need to revisit implementations to bring their practice in line with more recent developments elsewhere.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Cost of doing nothing - No additional costs will be directly accrued through inaction.
Part of use case: | Share your experience