Transcript Next Generation Library Automation

Wednesday January 14, 2009
George E. Bello Center for Information and Technology
Bryant University, Smithfield, Rhode Island
The Future of the
Integrated Library System:
moving toward the
next-generation of
library automation
Marshall Breeding
Director for Innovative Technologies and Research
Vanderbilt University
http://staffweb.library.vanderbilt.edu/breeding
http://www.librarytechnology.org/
HELIN







Consortium of academic and hospital libraries
Initially formed in 1984 to share CLSI circulation
system
Implementation of INNOPAC system 1991
Migration to Millennium
Brown Josiah catalog based on separate Millennium
implementation
InRhode Library Catalog = HELIN + Brown
Initial deployment of Encore
Library Technology Guides

http://www.librarytechnology.org

Repository for library automation data
Lib-web-cats tracks 38,000 libraries and the
automation systems used.

–

Expanding to include more international scope
Announcements and developments made by
companies and organizations involved in library
automation technologies
LJ Automation System
Marketplace
Annual Industry report published in Library Journal:
 2008: Opportunity out of turmoil
 2007: An industry redefined
 2006: Reshuffling the deck
 2005: Gradual evolution
 2004: Migration down, innovation up
 2003: The competition heats up
 2002: Capturing the migrating customer
Upheavals in the library
automation arena






Industry Consolidation
Abrupt transitions for major library
automation products
Increased industry control by external
financial investors
Demise of the traditional OPAC
Frustration with ILS products and vendors
Open Source alternatives hit the mainstream
Breeding, Marshall: Perceptions 2007 an international survey of library automation.
http://www.librarytechnology.org/perceptions2007.pl January 2008.
ILS Industry in Transition




Consolidation through mergers and
acquisitions have resulted in a fewer number
of players; larger companies
Uncomfortable level of product narrowing
Increased ownership by external interests
Yet: Some companies and products continue
on solid ground
Breeding, Marshall “Automation system marketplace 2008: Opportunity Out of Turmoil”
Library Journal. April 1, 2008.
Library Automation M&A History
Product and Technology Trends




Innovation below expectations
Conventional ILS less tenable
Proliferation of products related to e-content
management
New genre of discovery-layer interfaces
Web 2.0 / Collaborative Computing




Currently implemented ad hoc
Many libraries putting up blogs, wikis, and fostering
engagement in social networking sites
Proliferation of silos with no integration or
interoperability with larger library Web presence
Next Gen: Build social and collaborative features into
core automation components
Part II. A Mandate for Openness
Opportunities for Openness

Open Source
–

Alternative to traditionally licensed software
Open Systems
–
Software that doesn’t hold data hostage
Open Source Alternatives




Explosive interest in Open Source driven by
disillusionment with current vendors and
near-evangelical promotion of this software
licensing model
Beginning to emerge as a practical option
TOC (Total Cost of Ownership) still roughly
equal to proprietary commercial model
Still a risky strategy for libraries – traditional
licensing also risky
A result of industry turmoil



Disruptions and business decisions to narrow
options have fueled the open source
movement
Benefit to libraries in having additional
options
Traditionally licensed and open source ILS
alternatives will coexist in the ILS arena
Open Source ILS enters the
mainstream



Earlier era of pioneering efforts to ILS shifting
into one where open source alternatives fall
in the mainstream
Off-the-shelf, commercially supported
product available
Still a minority player, but gaining ground
Open Source ILS options

Koha
–

Evergreen
–

Commercial support from LibLime
Commercial support from Equinox Software
OPALS
–
Commercial support from Media Flex
Business case for Open Source ILS




Comparative total cost of ownership
Evaluate features and functionality
Evaluate technology platform and conceptual
models
Are they next-generation systems or open
source version of legacy models?
“Making a Business Case for Open Source ILS.” Marshall Breeding,
Computers in Libraries March 2008
http://www.librarytechnology.org/ltg-displaytext.pl?RC=13134
Software Development Models

How do companies approach software
development:
–
–
–
Ongoing maintenance work on existing products
(enhancement requests, bug fixes)
R&D toward future products (capital investment)
Sponsored Development: contracted custom
development paid for by individual sites, code
shared with current and future implementers.
Observations on Open Source ILS


Current Open Source ILS products similar in modular
organization and functionality to existing systems. Evolving to
achieve the same level of features and capacity present in
established commercial systems.
Initial wave of Open Source ILS commitments happened in the
public library arena. Recent activity among academic libraries:
–
–

WALDO Consortium (Voyager > Koha)
University of Prince Edward Island (Unicorn > Evergreen)
Do the current open source ILS products provide a new model
of automation, or an open source version of what we already
have?
Impact of Open Source ILS



Library automation industry cannot be
complacent
Some libraries moving from traditionally
licensed products to open source products
with commercial support plans
Disruption of ILS industry
–

new pressures on incumbent vendors to deliver
more innovation and to satisfy concerns for
openness
New competition / More options
More Open Systems



Pressure for traditionally licensed products to
become more open
APIs (Application Programming Interfaces)
let libraries access and manipulate their data
outside of delivered software
A comprehensive set of APIs potentially give
libraries more flexibility and control in
accessing data and services and in
extending functionality than having access to
the source code.
A Continuum of Openness
Closed Systems
End User
Interfaces:
Programmer
access:
Functional
modules:
Data Stores:
Staff Interfaces:
Cataloging Circulation Acquisitions
No
programmable
Access to the
system.
Captive to the
user
Interfaces
supplied by the
developer
Standard RDBM Systems
End User
Interfaces:
Programmer
access:
Functional
modules:
Data Stores:
Staff Interfaces:
Cataloging Circulation Acquisitions
Database
administrators
can access data
stores involved
with the system:
Read-only?
Read/write?
Developer
shares database
schema
Open Source Model
End User
Interfaces:
Programmer
access:
Functional
modules:
Data Stores:
Staff Interfaces:
Cataloging Circulation Acquisitions
All aspects of
the system
available to
inspection and
modification.
Open API Model
End User
Interfaces:
Programmer
access:
Functional
modules:
Data Stores:
Staff Interfaces:
Cataloging Circulation Acquisitions
Published APIs
Core
application
closed.
Third party
developers
code against
the published
APIs or
RDBMS tables.
Open Source / Open API Model
End User
Interfaces:
Programmer
access:
Functional
modules:
Data Stores:
Staff Interfaces:
Cataloging Circulation Acquisitions
Published APIs
Core
application
closed.
Third party
developers
code against
the published
APIs or
RDBMS tables.
Depth of Openness

Evaluate level of access to a products data stores
and functional elements:
–

Open source vs Traditional licenses
Some traditional vendors have well established API
implementations
–
–
–
SirsiDynix Unicorn (API available to authorized customer
sites that take training program)
Ex Libris: consistent deployment of APIs in major products,
recent strategic initiative: “Open Platform Program”
Innovative Interfaces: Patron API; Encore Web services
Universal open APIs?


Some progress on API to support discovery layer
interfaces, but no comprehensive framework yet.
Many industry protocols work like APIs:
–

Z39.50, SRU/W, NCIP, OAI-PMH, OpenURL, etd
It would be ideal if there were an open set of APIs
that were implemented by all automation system
products.
–
Third party components and add-ons would then work
across all products.
Opportunity out of the Upheavals

More options
–

More vendors
–

New open source support companies provide new
competition
More library involvement
–

Commercial + Open Source
Libraries re-energized to make significant contributions to
the body of library automation software
Traditionally licensed and open source automation
systems will co-exist. We have an interest in the
success of both alternatives.
Part III. Moving toward new
generation of library automation
Rethinking the ILS





Fundamental assumption: Print + Digital = Hybrid libraries
Traditional ILS model not adequate for hybrid libraries
Libraries currently moving toward surrounding core ILS with
additional modules to handle electronic content
New discovery layer interfaces replacing or supplementing ILS
OPACS
Working toward a new model of library automation
–
–
Monolithic legacy architectures replaced by fabric of SOA
applications
Comprehensive Resource Management
“It's Time to Break the Mold of the Original ILS” Computers in Libraries Nov/Dec 2007
ILS: a legacy concept?

ILS = Integrated Library System
(Cataloging + Circulation + OPAC + Serials + Acquisitions)





Focused on print and physical inventory
Electronic content at the Journal Title or collection
level
Emerged in the 1960’s – 1970’s
Functionality has evolved and expanded, but basic
concepts and modules remain intact
Note: Some companies work toward evolving the ILS to
competently handle both print and digital content (e.g.
Innovative Interfaces)
ILS: ever diminishing role





Many libraries putting much less emphasis on ILS
Just an inventory system for physical materials
Investments in electronic content increasing
Management of e-content handled outside of the ILS
Yet: libraries need comprehensive business
automation more than ever. Mandate for more
efficient operations. Do more with less.
Dis-integration of Library Automation
Functionality





ILS -- Print and Physical inventory
OpenURL Link resolver
Federated Search
Electronic Resource Management Module
Discovery layer interface
Is non-integrated automation
sustainable?





Major burden on library personnel
Serial procurement / installation / configuration /
maintenance cycles take many years to result in a
comprehensive environment
Inefficient data models
Disjointed interfaces for library users
Very long cycle to gain comprehensive automation
New genre of discovery layer
interfaces





Traditional ILS OPAC inadequate for today’s
Web-savvy library users
Scope too narrow
Complex, non-intuitive interface
Yet: Necessary for some types of research
Working toward a single point of entry for all
the content and services offered by the
library
Common Next-Gen Interface features







Decoupled interface
Advanced search engines
Relevancy ranked results
Faceted Navigation
Graphically enriched displays
Real-time interaction with ILS
Advanced user services and information
delivery features
Current Products

Encore (Innovative Interfaces)

Primo (Ex Libris)
Aquabrowser (Bowker / Serials Solutions)
WorldCat Local (OCLC)
BiblioCommons
Visualizer (VTLS)
eXtensive Catalog (University of Rochester)
VUFind (open source / Villanova University)
Scriblio (open source)







http://www.librarytechnology.org/discovery.pl
Deep search






Entering post-metadata search era
Increasing opportunities to search the full contents
– Google Library Print, Google Publisher, Open Content
Alliance, Microsoft Live Book Search, etc.
– High-quality metadata will improve search precision
Commercial search providers already offer “search
inside the book”
No comprehensive full text search for books quite yet
Beginning to appear in library search environments
– U of Mich (http://mblog.lib.umich.edu/blt/archives/2008/05/search_full-tex.html )
Deep search highly improved by high-quality metadata
See: Systems Librarian, May 2008 “Beyond the current generation of next-generation interfaces:
deeper search”
Architecture and Standards



Need to have an standard approach for
connecting new generation interfaces with
ILS and other repositories
Proprietary and ad hoc methods currently
prevail
Digital Library Federation
–
ILS-Discovery Interface Group
http://www.librarytechnology.org/blog.pl?ThreadID=43

Initial foray into a broader set of protocols
that open up other aspects of the ILS
Moving toward a new Generation of
Library Automation




Are Legacy ILS concepts sustainable?
New automation environment based on
current library realities and modern
technology platforms
Equal footing for digital and print
Service oriented architecture
Breaking down the modules

Traditional ILS
–
–
–
–
–
–

Cataloging
Circulation
Online Catalog
Acquisitions
Serials control
Reporting
Modern approach: SOA
Service Oriented Architecture
http://www.sun.com/products/soa/benefits.jsp
Legacy ILS + e-content modules
End User
Interfaces:
Circulation
Functional
modules:
Federated
Search
Cataloging
Data Stores:
Staff Interfaces:
Acquisitions
Serials
OpenURL
Linking
Electronic
Resource
Mgmt
System
SOA model for business automation

Underlying data repositories
–


Local or Global
Reusable business services
Composite business applications
SOA for library workflow processes
Composite
Applications
Granular
tasks:
Data Stores:
Reusable
Business
Services
Comprehensive Resource
Management




Broad conceptual approach that proposes a library
automation environment that spans all types of
content that comprise library collections.
Traditional ILS vendors: Under development but no
public announcements
Open Source projects in early phases
Projection: 2-3 years until we begin see library
automation systems that follow this approach. 5-7
years for wider adoption.
Open Library Environment (OLE)
project

Andrew W. Mellon Foundation
–
–



Research in Information Technology program
Solicited proposal / Lead institution
Duke University selected to lead project
Core Participants: Kansas University, Lehigh
University, National Library of Australia, Library and
Archives Canada, University of Pennsylvania,
Marshall Breeding
Advisory Participants: University of Chicago, Wittier
College, University of Maryland, ORBIS Cascade
Alliance, Rutgers University
http://www.mellon.org/grant_programs/programs/rit
OLE Project Status


Phase I to create requirements underway.
Kick-off Meeting at Duke
–


Regular online meetings
Meeting at Rutgers:
–
–




Training in business process modeling
More SOA
Regional workshops
–

Project scope, SOA training
Business Process Modeling for library workflows
Jan meeting at Lehigh
Feb meeting at University of Kansas
Final report due end of July
Organize Phase II – Build Project
–
Open source reference implementation
Ex Libris Universal Resource
Management



Next generation system
Management of digital and print resources
Forward path for both Voyager and ALEPH
OCLC


WorldCat local in pilot phase
Additional WorldCat-based automation
services under development?
Innovative Interfaces


Evolutionary path to next-generation
automation
Suite of products already offers
comprehensive automation
–
–
–
–
–
Millennium
Electronic Resource Management
Research Pro – federated search
Encore
Encore Web services API
Is there a future for the ILS?






Yes – libraries need efficient business process automation
more than ever
No – not if ILS means the current legacy model based on print
Revolutionary and evolutionary approaches will compete, both
working to address major shifts in library missions.
Urgent need to reinvent library automation
Opportunities abound for existing commercial providers and
open source initiatives.
Opportunities for libraries to take a more direct role in reshaping
the automation products they use
Questions and Discussion