KBART Phase II: The Next Step
Towards Better Metadata
Ben Johnson
Lead Metadata Librarian, KnowledgeWorks Provider Data
Acquisitions & Integration, Serials Solutions
Nettie Lagace
Associate Director for Programs, NISO
The Charleston Conference
November 9, 2012
1
OpenURL basics
print
collections
gateways
article citation
database
repository
publisher
website
publisher/provider
holdings data
OpenURL
query (base URL
+ metadata string)
link resolver/
knowledge base
target (cited)
article
What is a KnowledgeBase?
• A database
• Contains information about web resources
(global)
– e.g. what journal holdings are available in
JSTOR
– and how you link to articles in them
• Contains information about the resources a
library has licensed/owns (local)
– May contain electronic and print holdings (in
addition to a number of other services)
• Used by a link resolver to direct institutional
users to the ‘appropriate copy’
KnowledgeBase’s Central Role in the Library
• It knows where all the content is
• It knows which versions the library is able
to access
• So – it’s the only place that can get a user
to the “appropriate copy” … the one that
his/her library has licensed.
Benefits for All
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
More content visible to end users
Content linking is more accurate for end users
Increase in content usage
Maximum reach for authors and editors
Better return on investment for library
Favourable renewal decision
Protection of revenue for content providers
Where the chain breaks
• Wrong data
–
–
–
–
Publisher gives wrong metadata for title to the KB
Link resolver uses bad metadata to make link
Link does not resolve to correct target
Dead end 
• Outdated data
–
–
–
–
–
–
Publisher said it has a particular issue
Link resolver links to an article from it
Issue has been removed
Dead end 
Or, provider doesn’t notify that issue is now live
So no traffic from link resolvers to that issue!
KBART: A simple metadata exchange format
• Standards / industry
organisations
– UKSG and NISO
• Working group members
(stakeholders):
– Knowledge base vendors &
Subscription Agents
•
•
•
•
•
Ben Johnson, Serials Solutions
Christine Stohn, Ex Libris
Paul Moss, OCLC
Sheri Meares, EBSCO
Marieke Heins, Swets
– Content Providers (Publisher &
Aggregators)
• Matthew Llewellin, The Royal Society
• Gary Pollack, Cengage Learning
•
•
•
•
•
Rose Robinson, Publishing Technology
Andreas Biedenbach, Independent
Ruth Wells, Taylor & Francis
Julie Zhu, AIP
AIP, T&F, Royal Society Publishing,
Publishing Technology, Cengage Gale,
Swets, Springer
– Libraries & Consortia
•
•
•
•
Magaly Bascones, JISC
Sarah Price, University of Birmingham
Louise Cole, Kingston University
Chad Hutchens, University of
Wyoming
• Jason Price, Claremont
Colleges/SCELC
• Liz Stephenson, University of
Edinburgh
Ebooks
• Challenges
– Incomplete
– Non-standard data
– Frequency
9
Ebooks
• Phase I
– recommendations were serial-centric
– Some fields were dual-purpose
• date_first_issue_online
• Identifiers
– Holding’s content type was ambiguous
• Phase II
– 8 new monographic fields added
– Disambiguation of usage
10
Ebooks Serials! – Phase II
• Serials-only fields for Phase II:
–
–
–
–
–
–
date_first_issue_online
num_first_vol_online
num_first_issue_online
date_last_issue_online
num_last_vol_online
num_last_issue_online
11
Ebooks and Serials! – Phase II
• Fields used for both monographs and
serials:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Identifiers
title_id
embargo_info
coverage_depth
coverage_notes
title_url
Publication_type (Serial, Monograph)
12
New Ebooks fields for Phase II
•
•
•
•
•
date_monograph_published_print
date_monograph_published_online
monograph_volume
monograph_edition
first_editor
13
Book Series / Proceedings - Phase II
• Challenges
– Both serial and monograph
– Users search for both titles
• New fields
– parent_publication_title_id
– preceding_publication_title_id
14
Open Access
• OA has gotten more popular
• Importance of facilitating access to both
paid and free peer-reviewed, quality
publications (not just fee-based
material).
15
Open Access
• Challenges
– What to do with Hybrid OA models?
• Embargoed Hybrid OA – example: free access until
one year ago.
• Title transfer OA – title changes from OA to paid
(or vice versa) upon transfer to another publisher.
• Author-paid OA – some articles fee-based.
• Full OA – all content is free
– Title-level vs. article-level OA
metadata
16
Open Access
• The decision was made not to
differentiate between Free and OA for
KBART.
• Needed to strike a balance between
noting significant OA content and making
the file understandable.
17
Open Access
• Free-text coverage_notes field suggested
to explain subtleties of OA availability for
that particular title.
• New field – access_type
– “F” – title is mostly fee-based
(subscription/purchase)
– “OA” – 50% or more of the title is
OA/freely accessible.
18
Consortia
• Survey results
• Libraries purchase titles as a consortium
• Consortium administrators and librarians
need the same title-level information
from their consortium-purchased
packages as they do from “vanilla”
publisher packages.
• Difficult to obtain accurate consortiumspecific title lists.
19
Consortia
• We re-state the importance of providing a
separate file for each “Global” package that
the Content Provider offers.
• Consortium-specific files should be created
when:
– A unique set of titles has been packaged for
the consortium, different than the Content
Provider’s standard packages.
– A package contains unique dates
of coverage.
20
Consortia
• Changes to file naming for ALL files.
• Addition of “Region/Consortium” value in
file structure.
– [ProviderName]_[Region/Consortium]_[Package
Name]_[YYYY-MM-DD].txt
– Applicable to Consortia packages and Regional
variants (e.g., “Asia-Pacific”, “Germany”, etc.)
– “Global” value is used if the package
is available for all libraries to
purchase.
21
Consortia – New File Name Examples
• Title list is not region or consortium-specific, includes
all titles from the content provider:
– JSTOR_Global_AllTitles_2008-12-01.txt
– Taylor & Francis_Global_AllTitles_2012-08-30
• Title list is consortium-specific, for a specific package:
– IOP_NESLi2_Option 1 (2011)_2012-05-31.txt (includes a year as part of
the package name)
– Oxford_SCELC_AllTitles_2012-01-09.txt (contains all titles that the
consortium has subscribed to)
• Title list is region-specific, for a specific
package:
– Springer_Asia-Pacific_Medicine_2012-08-03.txt
22
KBART’s lifespan
Phase 1 – Universally accepted standardized publisher
metadata, regularly distributed AND available on
demand
Phase 2 – Broad adoption, Consortia, More content type
coverage (eBooks, conference proceedings), Open
Access materials
– Draft now in final stages
– Available for public review before the end of the year
Phase 3? – Even more content types, automated delivery,
institutional metadata????
Publisher Involvement
1. Everything can be found at
http://www.uksg.org/kbart/endorsement
2. Review the requirements (data samples available)
3. Format your title lists accordingly.
4. Self-check to ensure they conform to the
recommended practice
5. Ensure that you have a process in place for regular
data updates
6. Register your organization on the KBART registry
website: http://bit.ly/kbartregistry
thank you!
[email protected] * @abugseye
[email protected]
25