07. Contribute data to Google Scholar

The supply under open license of bibliographic records containing holdings data to Google in order to enhance discovery, location and delivery services for users.

Description

Activity - The supply under open license of bibliographic records containing holdings data to Google in order to enhance discovery, location and delivery services for users.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Actors - Library; Google
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Data involved - Bibliographic records containing holdings data. Google supports this for data published from link resolvers (aimed at electronic resources), the details are available at http://scholar.google.com/intl/en/scholar/libraries.html). Currently Google seems to only support links to library printed holdings via OCLC WorldCat, although it would seem logical that the current harvesting of electronic holdings information could be expanded to print holdings through negotiation with Google.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Data flow - Bibliographic data, plus details of link resolvers etc, are provided to Google. Robots refresh Google’s crawl of the data ‘periodically.’
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Does this require Open Data - Many university libraries already allow Google to harvest holdings data from their link resolvers, so while Open data is not necessary, it would establish an interesting principle in the supply chain.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Current Examples - Google Scholar
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Benefits

Institution - (1) Improved learning and research experience; (2) Marketing, through visibility of institutional holdings via Google
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Library Service - Something for nothing, delivering improved service to users
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Researchers - Potential to increase visibility of institutional holdings via Google rather than via less widely used institutional systems.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Students - Potential to increase visibility of institutional holdings via Google rather than via less widely used institutional systems.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Case for not doing it - Libraries may be wary of losing control over their own data and the user experience offered to their customers.
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Motivation

Principles - Improved access through discoverability of own resources and equivalent access to resources held by partner institutions
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Costs - Delivers value to library patrons by raising the web-scale visibility of holdings, free of charge.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Rationale for not doing it - Diverts the attention of library systems staff from more pressing concerns.
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 Google Scholar 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) The originator of elements of the bibliographic records challenges release as open data [see also UC1, UC2, UC3, UC4, UC5, UC6, UC15, UC16, UC17]; (3) Increased visibility of collection leads to demand beyond local resources ability to supply [see also UC3, UC4, UC5, UC6, 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) Increased use of library collection by internal and external users through improved discovery services [see also UC3, UC4, UC5, UC6, UC9, UC13, UC16, UC17].
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Consequences of not doing it? - The institution appears less visible – and less relevant – than peers that have chosen to participate
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Rights and Licensing Issues

Rights and licensing issues - The transfer of rights, and associated licensing issues, are not always clearly described by Google. This may cause concern.
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Practicalities

Data exchange formatting - The format Google currently support for institutional holdings information is documented at http://scholar.google.com/intl/en/scholar/institutional_holdings.xml.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Lifecycle implications - Minor; provision of modest file storage to host periodic data dumps for crawling by Google.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Hosting requirements - Relatively minor, unless local link resolvers etc are poorly configured and accept requests from all visitors
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Existing systems impact - Minor
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Skills demands - Working with existing vendors, local systems staff probably possess the necessary skills to modify link resolvers, produce periodic data dumps, etc.
Part of use case: | Share your experience

Costs

Setup - The necessary ‘export’ and link resolver capabilities may 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 infrastructural costs associated with sustaining this capability should be relatively low.
Part of use case: | Share your experience
Cost of doing nothing - No additional costs will be directly accrued through inaction. However, as more institutions participate in Google Scholar there may be a detrimental effect upon those institutions that choose not to have visibility through this service.
Part of use case: | Share your experience