03. Supply data for Physical Union Catalogue

Supply bibliographic records containing holdings data to a Union Catalogue service in order to enhance discovery, location and delivery services.

Description

Activity - The supply under open data license of bibliographic records containing holdings data to a Union Catalogue service in order to enhance discovery, location and delivery services for users, especially for special collections. This may also involve a collaborative or copy cataloguing opportunity [see UC11]. Compare with the variant approaches of UC4 and UC5.
This use case differs from UC4 because it is about the source library adopting open licensing to open up possibilities for exploitation of the data, whereas UC4 is about the Union Catalogue organizing the licensing.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Actors - Libraries; the external union catalogue service (which may be a shared service)
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Data involved - Bibliographic records, typically containing holdings data and potentially use data
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Data flow - Bibliographic and holdings records are transferred from the member institutions to the service, where they are imported in to the Union Catalogue. The service provider may undertake some enhancement such as linking book jackets or improving records, and the enhanced records may be supplied back to the source institutions or be made available to all contributing institutions.
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 by the Union Catalogue, contributing institutions, third parties and users will be unambiguous.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Current Examples - We are not aware of examples based on open data, though this approach could be adopted by such as Copac and Suncat in the UK.
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Benefits

Institution - Improved learning and research experience
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Library Service - Improved service to users including the possibility of value added services based on open use of records
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Researchers - Potential access to more extensive collections or greater copy availability from other universities and research institutions
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Students - Potential access to more extensive collections or greater copy availability from other universities
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Replication - The bibliographic data extraction process will be of use for other services requiring conditional release of records. Appropriate generic licensing as opposed to a proprietary agreement with the service provider may open up other shared service or third party service opportunities.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Case for not doing it - Libraries may be wary of their own or the collective data being re-sold to them or devalued in terms of quality by a downstream player.
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Motivation

Principles - Improved access through discoverability of own resources and access to resources held by partner institutions. Making bibliographic data open for re-use increases those opportunities both within and beyond the Union Catalogue service; doing so at source simplifies the process of developing new services.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Services - Enhancement of the Union Catalogue service, leading to fuller use of the local collection and exploitation of partner collections
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Rationale for not doing it - (1) Not joining a Union Catalogue Service – perhaps believing that library domain services do not compete effectively with generic search engines; (2) Not supplying the records as Open Data – uncertainty about the rights attached to records not originated locally, such as those wholly or partially derived from a collaborative cataloguing service, from publishers or from such as a national library.
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Consequences of doing it as Open Data

What will happen? - (1) Staff and students will have the opportunity to access an existing library service in a different way; (2) Additional discovery channels will add value to the user experience and may increase demand on some areas of the local collection, whilst displacing demand from other areas; (3) Presence in a centralised union catalogue will increase visibility of library data to a wider audience.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Potential Risks - (1) Loss of control over institutional data; (2) Damage to institutional reputation through provision of substandard product by a third party [see also UC4, UC5, UC16, UC17]; (3) The originator of elements of the bibliographic records challenges release as open data [see also UC1, UC2, UC4, UC5, UC6, UC7, UC15, UC16, UC17]; (4) Increased visibility of collection leads to demand beyond local resources ability to supply [see also UC4, UC5, UC6, UC7, UC9, UC13, UC16, UC17].
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Potential Opportunities - (1) Development of innovative / compelling third party services based on open data; (2) Shift to outsourced cataloguing and OPAC services [see also UC4, UC5, UC9, UC11]; (3) Increased use of library collection by internal and external users through improved discovery services [see also UC4, UC5, UC6, UC7, UC9, UC13, UC16, UC17]; (4) Sufficiently large Centralised Union Catalogues to provide ‘web–scale’ opportunities [see also UC4, UC5].
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Consequences of not doing it? - (1) Reduced exposure of library collection; (2) Centralised Union service put at risk if significant numbers of libraries do not contribute.
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Rights and Licensing Issues

Rights and licensing issues - This use case requires the explicit transfer of records to a third party, and will typically be governed by some form of contractual relationship. Whether that transfer is classed as ‘use’ or ‘supply’ will depend upon the nature of the relationship between the organizations involved. See http://www.jisclegal.ac.uk/Projects/ TransferandUseofBibliographicRecords.aspx.
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Practicalities

Data exchange formatting - All models require engagement with actual or potential union catalogue providers to decide most appropriate record format, although Union catalogue services are highly likely to be familiar with MARC format.
  • Model 1: A standard MARC export from the LMS, based on specified criteria. 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: Records exported from the LMS based on specified criteria transformed into one or more formats to make data as accessible as possible to a wide range of interested parties [see Use Case 16] Additional exports on a regular basis which represent either a full export or just changes (additions, updates and deletions) based on the original export.
  • Model 3: The use of OAI-PMH to harvest either Dublin Core or MARC- XML records with subsequent harvesting to create/update/delete records.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Lifecycle implications -
  • Models 1 & 2: Regular supply of updated records, either by full export or changes (additions, updates and deletions) based on the original export.
  • Model 3: Continued running of OAI-PMH target.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Hosting requirements - For Models 1 and 2, hosting may be the responsibility of the shared service; or there may be a requirement for local hosting, from which data can periodically be retrieved by the shared service. For Model 3, provision of an OAI-PMH target would be required.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Existing systems impact - None other than for Model 3 for which existing systems would need to support OAI-PMH.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Skills demands -
  • Models 1 & 2: Subject to LMS support of export of MARC records based on specified criteria, this should fall within the capabilities of a systems librarian. If ‘differential’ updates required by Union catalogue service, it would either be necessary for this function to be available in the LMS, or for some basic development to be done locally to produce differential update files (additions, updates, deletions). In the latter case this would require experience beyond simply running LMS reports, although should be within the capabilities of a systems librarian or local IT staff.
  • Model 2: An ability to transform data between library specific format and more generic formats. This may be achieved via a third party application or through some basic development undertaken locally. This would require experience beyond simply running LMS reports, although may be within the capabilities of a systems librarian or local IT staff.
  • Model 3: Running an OAI-PMH service. If this is provided by the LMS this would simply require configuration and 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.
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, supplying data on a case-by-case basis without adopting an open license or permissive contract may result in an ongoing requirement to receive, assess, and respond to requests for data from third parties.
Part of use case: | Share your experience