- 01. Publish data for unspecified use
- 02. Publish open Linked Data for unspecified use
- 03. Supply data for Physical Union Catalogue
- 04. Allow Physical Union Catalogue to publish data
- 05. Expose data for federation into Virtual Union Catalogue
- 06. Publish grey literature data
- 07. Contribute data to Google Scholar
- 08. Publish activity data
- 09. Supply holdings data for Collection Management
- 10. Expose holdings / availability data for Closest Copy location
- 11. Share data for Collaborative Cataloguing
- 12. Supply data for Crowd Sourced Cataloguing
- 13. Supply data to be enhanced for own use
- 14. Publish data for LIS research
- 15. Allow personal use of data for Reference Management
- 16. Publish data for lightweight application development
- 17. Allow commercial use of data in mobile application
06. Publish grey literature data
The supply under open license of bibliographic records describing institutional grey literature.
Activity - The supply under open license of bibliographic records describing institutional grey literature.
Actors - Library, academic authors of grey literature, repository managers elsewhere in institution
Data involved - Bibliographic records describing institutional grey literature; may also involve full text of documents and associated research data.
Data flow - Data on grey literature collected from across the institution, typically in the context of an institutional repository.
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.
Current Examples - University of Ghent, University of Southampton (ECS)
Institution - (1) Improved learning and research experience; (2) Marketing, through visibility of institutional outputs
Library Service - (1) Improved service to users; (2) Increased visibility to key stakeholders inside the institution
Researchers - Potential to increase visibility of institutional holdings and to amplify own research
Students - Potential to increase visibility of institutional holdings
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
Case for not doing it - Too difficult to be comprehensive, opening up an open-ended commitment
Principles - Raise internal and external visibility of institutional resources not formally published elsewhere.
Costs - Delivers value to the institution by increasing visibility of expensively created institutional resources.
Services - Enhances mission of institutional repositories
Rationale for not doing it - Diverts the attention from more pressing concerns, in repositories and contributing researcher groups
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.
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.
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]
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.
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.
Data exchange formatting - Dublin Core, for dissemination via an OAI repository?
Lifecycle implications - Modest; infrastructure to support an institutional OAI repository.
Hosting requirements - Relatively minor
Existing systems impact - There is an ongoing requirement to encourage deposition and use.
Skills demands - Configuring an OAI repository is relatively straightforward. Evangelising deposition into the repository is a harder and more of a long term task.
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.
Ongoing - The infrastructural costs associated with sustaining this capability should be relatively low. The human cost of encouraging deposition and use is more significant.
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.