Transcript DLF ERMI - National Information Standards Organization

Whither ERMI?
the Once and Future DLF Electronic Resource
Management Initiative
becomes
NISO ERM Data Standards Review
Ivy Anderson
California Digital Library
NISO Forum
Library Resource Management Systems: New Challenges, New Opportunities
October 8-9, 2009
Metro Meeting Center
Boston, MA
Oren’s opening remarks

Libraries want:



Single entry point for discovery and delivery
Consolidating workflows – uniting traditional
functions with digital library functions
Re-use of bibliographic metadata for leveraging of
effort
A Working Definition for ERMs
“Tools for managing the license agreements, related
administrative information, and internal processes
associated with collections of licensed electronic
resources.”
Ellen Duranceau, Against The Grain, June 2005
Background: Digital Library Federation
E-Resource Management Initiative
Evolution of the DLF Initiative



Outgrowth of Tim Jewell’s 2001 DLF study, “Selection and
Presentation of Commercially Available Electronic
Resources”
Two-Year Project 2002-2004
Goals:
 “Develop common specifications and tools for managing the
license agreements, related administrative information, and
internal processes associated with collections of licensed
electronic resources”
 Describe architectures needed for electronic resource
management
 Foster systems development
 Promote best practices and standards
http://www.diglib.org/standards/dlf-erm02.htm
Drivers
 E-resources an increasing focus of library
purchasing activity
ARL Libraries 2007 E-Resource
Expenditures
Electronic Resources Expenditures as a Percent of Total Materials
Expenditures
50
Percent
40
30
Average
20
10
0
2003
2004
2005
2006
Year
2003: $230 million (25%)
2007: $536 million (47%)
2007
Drivers

E-resources are different from print





Trends in local practice

Wide staff involvement in selection, implementation & ongoing
support
Tracking and presenting license terms to staff and end users

Planned/cyclic product evaluations prior to renewal


Complex to describe
Complex to fund and acquire
Complex to support and manage
Rise of licensing as a new practice in libraries
Lack of tools to support new activities and workflows
Print Acquisitions Workflow
Select
Order
Catalog
Bind / Book Prep
E-Resource Acquisitions Workflow
Propose
Evaluate
Content, Platform, Cost
OK
License
Technical Feasibility
OK
OK
Approve / Negotiate
Order / Register for Access
Implement
Proxy Server
Portal
Catalog
Link Resolver
Ongoing Management / Stewardship
License
terms
Price
Trial
Assess
need/budget
Order, Register
Evaluate
Catalog
User
feedback
Investigate
Digital Registry
Usage stats
Review
alternatives
Review
problems
Evaluate
Monitor
Provide Access
Track problems
Gateway
Contact info
WebBridge
Provide Support
Inform users
Proxy server
Administer
Payment, manage
financials
Setup contacts
Troubleshoot
Manage changes
Provide Training
Customize interface
Holdings
management
Set up usage statistics
The DLF ERMI 2004 Report
The DLF ERMI 2004 Report

Relationships (Data Model)



Information (Data Dictionary)





Packages and their constituent parts
Knowing which resources share the same interface,
license terms, business terms…
License permissions and constraints
User IDs, passwords, administrative info
Contacts for support and troubleshooting
Cancellation restrictions, price caps, etc.
Workflows (Functional Requirements)





Mounting Trials
Routing Licenses
Placing Orders
Implementing access
Notifying relevant staff
Appendix C: Entity Relationship Diagram
Appendix D: Data Element Dictionary


Almost 350 data elements with definitions
Alphabetical order
excerpt:
Data
Element
Name
Identifier
Definition
Comments
Embargo
Period
embargoperiod
The amount of time by which
content is intentionally delayed
Refer to developing standards (e.g., ONIX for
Serials) for values
Fair Use
Clause
Indicator
fairuseclause
A clause that affirms statutory fair
use rights under U.S. copyright
law (17 USC Section 107), or that
the agreement does not restrict or
abrogate the rights of the licensee
or its user community under
copyright law
Fair use rights include, but are not limited to,
printing, downloading, and copying
Most applicable for U.S. libraries but may be
of interest for other countries when recording
terms for products licensed by U.S.
businesses
Format
format
The form of presentation of a
resource
Examples of electronic formats include
descriptions of text (e.g., ASCII); images
(e.g., JPEG); audio (e.g., “basic”)
Appendix E: Data Structure



The data elements of Appendix D structured to show
logical groupings and relationships
System functionality explanations
Data types, enumerated values, cardinality
excerpt:
Interface Entity
Definition
Interface entity is part of the master set Electronic Product. It is comprised of many elements identifying or associated with the interface of
an electronic resource. An interface is the software platform or website through which a particular electronic resource is made available.
Elements
Interface ID, Interface Acquisition, Interface Prevailing Terms, Interface Access Information, Interface Administrative Information, Interface
Name, Interface Digital Object Identifier, Interface Other Identifier Source, Interface Other Identifier Number, Interface Provider, Medium,
Interface Status, Interface Public Note
Notes
Elements may be derived from other linked entities as appropriate. Interface is one of two subsets of the Electronic Product set; for some
bridge entities an id from either its sibling Electronic Resource or from Interface must be present, but both are not always required. FR19
Element
Definition
Element
Type
System Use /
Functionality
Interface ID The identification number assigned to
the interface by the electronic
resource management system
unique ID
system
generated
identifier
Interface
Acquisition
The acquisition which has made the
interface available to the collection
pointer
Interface
Prevailing
Terms
The business and legal terms under
which the interface is licensed and
acquired
pointer
FR1, FR2
Values
Optionality
Repeat- Notes / Examples
ability
R
N
ID from
Acquisition entity
RA
N
ID from the
Prevailing
Terms entity
RA
N
This should be considered a
unique local identifier. Links an
Interface record to other data.
Functional Requirements

Support the ‘Life Cycle’ of electronic
resources





Selection and acquisition
Access provision
Resource administration
User support and troubleshooting (staff and endusers)
Renewal and retention decisions
ERMI Successes

Articulated the relationships among licenses, resources,
packages, providers, and platforms

Fostered recognition that licenses and related metadata had to
be properly managed

Spawned the development of systems to manage e-resource
information

“If last year’s hot product was federated searching, then 2004 belongs to
electronic resources management (ERM)” and of the impact of the DLF
ERMI documents: “in a nearly unprecedented move, nearly every large
automation vendor has used the specifications created by librarians.”
Andrew Pace, American Libraries, 2004
What ERMI Was Not
A Standard
EDItEUR review of ERMI

ERMI Phase 1 as a basis for a standard for
license terms expression; commissioned from
Rightscom

ERMI 1 was a valuable starting point, but
further development required

Terms dictionary would need a more rigorous
ontological structure

Proposed an <indecs>-based rights model:
licenses are about events (permitted,
prohibited, required, etc)
The DLF Electronic Resource
Management Initiative, Phase II (2006)

Training for License Term Mapping


E-Resource Usage Statistics



(ARL/DLF collaboration)
Protocol for automated delivery (“SUSHI”)
Statement of functional requirements
Data Standards


Data Dictionary revision
License Expression
License Information:
Challenges
ERMI Terms of Use Elements
 Fair Use Clause Indicator
 Database Protection Override
Indicator
 All Rights Reserved Indicator
 Citation Requirement Details
 Authorized User Definition
 Local Authorized User
Definition Indicator
 Other User Restriction Note
 Other Use Restriction Note
 Concurrent User
 Digitally Copy*
 Print Copy*












Scholarly Sharing*
Distance Education*
Interlibrary Loan Print or Fax*
Interlibrary Loan Secure
Electronic Transmission*
Interlibrary Loan Electronic*
Interlibrary Loan Record
Keeping Required Indicator
Course Reserve Print*
Course Reserve Electronic/
Cached Copy*
Electronic Link Permission*
Course Pack Print*
Course Pack Electronic*
Remote Access*
ERMI Permission Values






Permitted (explicit)
Permitted (interpreted)
Prohibited (explicit)
Prohibited (interpreted)
Silent (uninterpreted)
Not Applicable
ERMI Mapping Challenges






Different wording
Term buried in the license
License more granular than data element
Data element more granular than license
No match between license and data elements
Local interpretation
ONIX for Publications Licenses
(ONIX-PL)

Joint License Expression Working Group (LEWG)
sponsored by NISO, DLF, PLS and EDItEUR (2005)

now ONIX-PL Working Group (2008)

http://www.niso.org/workrooms/onixpl

A structured ontology and XML messaging protocol for
exchanging licensing information

ONIX-PL format specification v1.0 (2008)

Pilots underway by JISC and others

ONIX-ERMI mapping completed 2007
Enter SERU
Other Related Standards Developments
post-ERMI

Usage Data: COUNTER and SUSHI

Knowledge-bases: KBART

Cost Data: CORE

Institutional Identifiers: I2
COUNTER: Counting Online Usage of
Networked Electronic Resources



Code of Practice first released Jan 2003
Release 3 published Aug 2008
Code of Practice Addresses:

Content, format, delivery mechanisms and data
processing rules for a set of core usage reports




Terminology
Layout and format of reports
Processing of usage data
Delivery of reports
NISO Standardized Usage Statistics
Harvesting Initiative (SUSHI): Z39.93

A key project of the ERMI 2 initiative

Solves the problem of harvesting and managing usage
data from a growing number of providers

A web-services model for requesting data that replaces
the user’s need to download files from vendor’s website


The SUSHI client runs on the library’s server, usually associated
with an ERM system.
The SUSHI server runs on the Content Provider’s server, and has
access to the usage data.
SUSHI is Now a Requirement of the
COUNTER 3 Code of Practice
Vendors must be SUSHI-compliant
as of September 2009
Future of SUSHI: Beyond
COUNTER reports

SUSHI was designed as a general protocol for
retrieving XML “reports”

SUSHI can be used for non-COUNTER usage
reports

SUSHI can also be used for other XML
“messages”, for example, automate delivery of:

Holdings data with ONIX-SOH

License terms with ONIX PL
Source: Oliver Pesch Presentation <http://www.niso.org/workrooms/sushi/info/OPESCH__SUSHI-Lille.ppt>
KBART (Knowledge Base and Related
Tools)

Joint effort of NISO and the UK Serials Group
(launched January 2008)

Draft guidelines for best practice to effect
smoother interaction between members of
the knowledge base supply chain


Content standards for holdings data exchange
Centralized information portal
http://www.uksg.org/kbart/
NISO Cost of Resource Exchange
(CORE): Z39.93-200x

DLF-ERMI White Paper on Interoperability between Acquisitions
Modules of Integrated Library Systems and Electronic Resource
Management Systems (January 2008)

Working Group Co-chairs



Ed Riding, SirsiDynix
Ted Koppel, Auto-Graphics
Facilitate transfer of acquisitions data between ILS and ERM systems

provide a common method of requesting cost-related information from an ILS
for a specific electronic resource




Develop and refine the list of data elements to exchange
create a transport protocol useful in moving these data elements from one system
to another.
Write a small number of use cases
Draft Standard for Trial Use available (March 2009)
http://www.niso.org/workrooms/core
I2: Institutional Identifiers Working
Group


http://www.niso.org/workrooms/i2
Co-chairs






Grace Agnew, Rutgers University
Tina Feick, Harrassowitz
A globally unique, extensible identifier for institutions
for use in the information supply chain
E-Resources, Institutional Repositories, Library
Resource Management
Related work: OCLC Networking Names
http://oclcresearch.webjunction.org/networking_nam
es
Learning from ERMI:
some thoughts

Comprehensiveness is difficult



To describe
To build and implement
Example: e-metrics




Many useful sources, multiple views needed
E-resources and markets change quickly
Small-scale development works
Robust data exchange is critical
Library needs for e-resource data
manipulation march relentlessly onward
Enter ERMI Data Standards
Review
Goal: “Gap Analysis”

Is the ERMI Data Dictionary still needed?

If so, what persistent structures should be
instituted to revise and maintain it?

What other e-resource management needs
remain unaddressed by current standards
efforts?
Current E-Resource Standards Landscape
ALA Midwinter 2009 NISO-led
Discussions: What We Heard

Discussed current ERM needs and future of ERMI with over a
dozen domain experts:


Librarians, system developers, standards representatives, supply
chain vendors
Libraries want:





Simplified license elements
Workflow tools and best practices
Authority control for products, vendors (including tracking vendor
name changes, acquisitions & mergers)
Management of data elements for future interoperability and data
transport
Holdings data for ebooks and journals – a huge pain point for
many customers – ““this resource from this publisher / provider
on this platform during this time period“
What We Heard: Flexibility

Need an ERMI lite for selected core elements
and lots of free form notes – for business
terms, resources in negotiation, etc.

Rapidly evolving business models – open
access, pay-per-view…
What We Heard: Conflicting Inputs

Focus on data elements, leave application to
system developers. User community should
shape application and use

Libraries need best practices guidance to
help them implement systems
What We Heard: ERMI Still Has Many
Champions

“We still need ERMI to create a context for how all of
the pieces need to work together”

“ERMI has done a good job of identifying and
organizing the problem, not necessarily solving it”

“ERMI should be the master custodian of data
elements “

“One thing ERMI has done well is to define a data
dictionary that different systems can use to move
data around”
Major Takeaways

About Standards




ERMI data model is still important for reference and context
Data dictionary is key to functionality and interoperability
License elements / values need simplification – ONIX-PL may or
may not serve library needs
Vendor and product identity management is an ongoing problem



About Libraries


need to accurately represent vendor-resource-holdings relationships
need to manage resources and holdings in a standardized and shareable
way
Libraries need help with workflows and best practices
About Systems



Existing systems are under-developed
Libraries need more specific functionality – ability to import / export
data, support everyday business activities / functions
Data exchange capability is critical
NISO ERM Data Standards Review:
Goals

Perform a ‘gap analysis’ of functions and needs unaddressed by existing
standards

More data-gathering through surveys, conference-related focus groups, webinars

Make recommendations for future work

Membership currently being formed


Seek participation from librarians, systems and content management vendors,
publishers
A mailing list will be set up for wider communication

Report due to NISO Business Topic Committee April 2010

More information at
http://www.niso.org/apps/group_public/workgroup.php?wg_abbrev=ermreview
Future Data Movement and Management
Landscape Features?
 Budget constraints are real, getting tougher, and not
going away
 Libraries need to get more efficient
 We need less:


Silo-ization
Redundancy of effort
 We need more:




Modularity, specialized applications
Data sharing and transport
“Light weight” standards
Flexible, dynamic structures for “knitting” pieces together
where needed
Broader Challenges

“It’s about agility and flexibility”


As library systems and services move from the
local level to the network level, how do we ensure
agility and adaptability?
Can our organizations evolve fast enough?