A Strategy for Network Disclosure using MARC21 Format for Holdings

Transcription

1 5 June 2012 #SharedPrintMgt Bibliographic Infrastructure for Shared Print Collections A Strategy for Network Disclosure using MARC21 Format for Holdings Constance Malpas Program Officer OCLC malpasc@oclc.org

2 Shared Print: What s the Problem? Shift in scholarly attention from print to electronic means low-use retrospective print collections are perceived to deliver less library value Competing demands for library space: teaching, learning, collaboration vs. warehouse of books Among academic libraries, a shrinking pool of institutions with mandate, capacity to support print preservation As transaction costs for managing legacy print collections decrease, libraries will seek to externalize print operations to shared repositories

3 The Future of Shared Collections Economic and space pressures will make shared print management strategies more prevalent An active archive isn t just move it and forget it Ongoing management of collections is required Workflows need to be mainstreamed with other resource management practices Retrospective vs. building shared collections through new acquisitions Relationship to HathiTrust, Portico and other digital archiving efforts

4 Implications for Bibliographic Infrastructure In emerging environment, registration of item (copy) level data is required to support: Preservation risk assessment how many copies exist in the system? What is their condition? Are they subject to archival / persistence agreements? Collection management which copies in local collection should be retained? How can space recovery be maximized? How can inventory be optimized? New business models what is the total value of outsourcing preservation and access to shared repository?

5 Fundamental requirements Print archiving institutions need: A mechanism to record and disclose institutional archiving commitments at title and volume level Decision support to identify/select titles and volumes suitable for archiving Print archive clients need: Decision support to identify/select titles and volumes suitable for withdrawal, based on existing archiving commitments, and/or donation (to fill gaps in archive)

6 Shared Print: OCLC Research Active portfolio of work since 2007: North American library storage capacity (2007) ~70M volumes in storage; further capital investment unlikely Policy requirements shared print repositories (2009) critical need: disclosure of print preservation commitments Leveraging infrastructure: MARC Note (2009) copy-level retention, condition statements are required Cloud-sourcing research collections (2010) mass digitization of monographs accelerates shift to shared print

7 Print Archive Activities at OCLC Evaluate ways in which OCLC can help to support immediate and future needs for shared print management First priority: address needs for registering and disclosing retention commitments for print resources Leverage existing library investment in WorldCat Shared Print Archives Disclosure Pilot project

8 Why use MARC 583? Defined for use in both bibliographic and local holdings record; flexible implementation Successfully deployed for cooperative microfilming projects in US, web archiving in Australia, DLF/OCLC Registry of Digital Masters Existing PDA thesaurus includes terms appropriate for print archiving actions (retained, condition reviewed, etc.)

9 Registering Print Archiving Actions 583 Action Note Action committed to retain, condition reviewed etc. Authorization identifies Print Archive program Status condition or completeness statement Method of Action level of validation Materials Specified if different from the 85x/86x Institution identifies archiving agent

10 583 tag usage in WorldCat 5,820,316 bib level MARC 583 tags in WorldCat (Apr 2012) Vast majority (91%) are for monographic titles Very few (2%) include $3 materials specified detail As presently implemented, ill-suited to registration of cooperative preservation commitments For serial holdings, especially, greater specificity of holdings and stewardship responsibility is needed

11 Registry of Digital Masters 5,096,007 title-level digital preservation commitments registered in WorldCat (May 2012) 5,040,330 (99%) from HathiTrust 55,680 from other digitization projects Industrial scale aggregation led to streamlined process, created critical mass in WorldCat Centralizing, automating metadata creation facilitates upstream quality assurance

12 Example 1: Registry of Digital Masters This print edition held by 169 WorldCat libraries. The University of Chicago has digitized it and has registered a commitment to preserve the digital surrogate

13 Example 2: UK Research Reserve This print edition held by 5 WorldCat libraries. St Andrews University Library has registered a commitment to preserve a print copy.

14 Why implement at local holdings level? Recording preservation commitments at title level in bibliographic record is practically impossible for serial publications (gaps in holdings, condition may vary from one volume to the next) LHR implementation supports distributed archiving efforts in which multiple libraries commit to preserve partial runs; less resource intensive than consolidating complete runs at a single institution

15 Local Holdings Records in WorldCat 32,842,128 detailed holdings records (May 2012) Contributions from >10,000 libraries 38% of detailed holdings contributed by 85 ARL (1% of contributors) Institutions most likely to assume print archiving responsibility are already contributing holdings Easier to reinforce an existing behavior than to institutionalize a new one

16 Growth of Local Holdings in WorldCat 35 Millions of Detailed Holdings Records

17 Print Archive Pilot Worked with 8 print archiving institutions to establish and test LHR-based approach CRL JSTOR archive WEST partners (UC San Diego, UCLA, Stanford, University of Oregon, SRLF) CIC Shared Print Archive (Indiana University) University of Minnesota dark JSTOR archive Pilot ran through 2011 and early 2012

18 Print Archives Pilot activities Drafted metadata guidelines (2011) Developed controlled vocabulary (2011) Tested LHR contribution via OCLC Connexion Browser and batch-load utility (2011/2012) Evaluated resource sharing workflows (2012) Documented implementation processes, identified critical roadblocks (2012)

19 Print Archive Pilot Final Report, April 2012 Report includes: Summary of activities Metadata guidelines Sample title data Implementation checklist Recommendations for libraries Recommendations for OCLC

20 Recommendations for Disclosure (1) Establish new Print Archive institution symbols For a shared storage Print Archive model, only one symbol needed for the Archive itself For an archive-in-place model, need new symbols for each participating institution Less than ideal, but necessary to support resource sharing Contribute LHRs containing 583 tag data Establish best practices for use of the 583 and other LHR fields for print archiving For shared model, need a consolidated file of LHRs since load replaces rather than merges

21 Recommendations for Disclosure (2) Create Group Access Capability (GAC) to facilitate discovery LHR 583 data also indexed in Connexion (use io: label) Assumption of an active archive requires support for resource sharing Prioritization, deprecation or deflection for lending NB Proposed method is optimized for serials but extensible (in principle) to monographs

22 Model implementation: Registration of print archiving commitment Title held by 1100 libraries; hundreds of local holdings profiled

23 Recommendations for Print Archives Wherever feasible, contribute detailed holdings statement with 583 Action Note in accordance with Print Archives guidance $a-action, $c-time/date of action, $l-status $2-Source of term are critical (and mandatory per PDA) $d-action interval $f Authorization, $i-method of action, $j- Site of action etc. required where applicable If registration at local holdings level is not possible, record print archiving commitment in the bibliographic record $a-action, $3-Materials specified, $5-Institution are critical

24 Collectively, we are making progress: As of 1 June 2012, 32 new shared print / print archiving symbols in WorldCat

25 Collectively, we are making progress: As of 1 June 2012, more than 2800 titles with print archiving commitments in WorldCat

26 Collectively, we are making progress: LHR 583 tag data indexed in Connexion use IO label for searching, with or without shared print symbols

27 What s Next? FAQ for print archiving support at OCLC will be published soon: How to request new shared print symbol Set up for batchloading LHR Metadata guidelines Resource sharing tips Exploring application of 583 strategy for monographic print archiving

28 Constance Malpas Questions? Comments?

29 Bibliographic Infrastructure for Shared Print Collections: Metadata Guidelines Lizanne Payne WEST Project Manager ReCAP Planning Consultant Shared Print Collections Consultant

30 Disclosing Shared Print Collections in OCLC OCLC WorldCat OCLC Resource- Sharing OCLC symbol, Local Holding Records (LHRs) with 583 Action Note(s) OCLC symbol Lender string Group Access Catalog Library Catalogs 30

31 Primary Goal of the OCLC Print Archives Disclosure Pilot Pr Propose and assess the feasibility of a metadata standard for disclosing in the near term the location and status of archived print holdings for journals, using existing bibliographic infrastructure (OCLC and local ILS capabilities). That is, implementation would not require any software development. 31

32 Guidelines for Journal Archiving, Not Tested for Monographs Please note that these guidelines were designed and tested for journal holdings. While the data structures theoretically would be usable for monographs, there may be variations in functionality related to using LHRs for monographs that have not been tested. 32

33 Metadata Guidelines: Three-Part Data Structure for Print Archived Items Define separate OCLC Institution Symbols for the libraries and storage facilities that hold shared print materials Enter holdings-level print archives data in MARC Holdings records (OCLC Local Holdings Records, LHRs) Use the 583 Action Note to describe specific characteristics of the print archives action(s) for each set of holdings 33

34 Why a Separate OCLC Institution Symbol? OCLC resource-sharing, collection analysis systems, and group catalogs depend on symbols Indicates that a title is subject to some form of a retention commitment at a given institution Supports different lending behaviors for these items compared to materials in the general collection or storage facility 34

35 Examples of Shared Print Symbols Symbol CLUSP CUSSP CRLAA IULSP MLCSP STFSP SL3SP ORUSP ZASSP Description UCLA Shared Print in Place UCSD Shared Print in Place CRL Print Journal Archive Indiana University Shared Print in Storage University of Minnesota Shared Print in Storage Stanford Libraries Shared Print in Place Stanford SAL3 Shared Print in Storage University of Oregon Shared Print in Place UC SRLF Shared Print in Storage

36 Local Holdings Record: Key Fields for Shared Print Field Description Required by OCLC 004 or 014 or and 007 and 008 Needed for Shared Print OCLC Number Required Required Leader/Directory Required Required 852 Location Required Required 85x/86x OR Coded formatted holdings OR Summary holdings (if no 85x/86x) Required 583 Action Note Required 022 International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) Desirable 561 Ownership and Custodial History Desirable 36

37 LHR Location and Holdings (Required for Shared Print) Location 852 a Location: Enter the new shared print Institution Symbol 852 b Sublocation: Enter a sublocation or collection if applicable Holdings 85x/86x Coded formatted holdings OR Summary holdings Enter the holdings that are covered by the shared print agreement For institutions that already provide LHRs to OCLC, libraries should remove the archived holdings from the original LHR or holdings data,

38 LHR ISSN and Ownership History (Desirable for Shared Print) International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) (022) 022 a: Enter the ISSN for the print title being archived Provides a standard match point to support linking of LHR information with other data sources Ownership and Custodial History (561) 561 a: Enter the OCLC Institution Symbol of the original owner of these shared print holdings If the shared print title being recorded was consolidated from multiple owners, provide a separate 561 for each original owner Provides a means of identifying the original owner(s) for 108 compliance The world s libraries. or for Connected. future shared print collection analysis

39 LHR 583 Action Note (The most important field for shared print collections) Describes specific characteristics of the print archives action(s) for each set of holdings Includes information about: Shared print program Retention period Validation (review) performed (if any)

40 583 Action Notes for Print Archives Include one, two, or three 583 Action Notes as appropriate. 1. For all archived titles, include a 583 tag with a committed to retain The minimum to identify shared print materials Ideally can be created in batch 2. For titles that were reviewed for completeness of the run, include another 583 tag with a completeness reviewed and report any identified gaps 3. For titles that were reviewed for condition, include another 583 tag with a condition reviewed and record the conditions found

41 583 Action Note for Committed to Retain Subfield MARC Subfield Desc Contents for Shared Print a Action committed to retain c Time/Date of Action Date commitment was made (YYYYMMDD) d Action interval Date commitment expires f Authorization Archiving program eg WEST, CRL JSTOR, CIC SPR j Site of Action Holding Location Code (if different than 852 b) u Uniform Resource Identifier Link to program documentation The minimum 3 Materials specified Detailed holdings to which action applies, if different from 85x/86x or Institution to which field applies MARC org code (if available) for archiving institution

42 Sample Retention-Only Record

43 583 Action Note for Completeness Reviewed If no validation was done, you do not need this 583 Subfield MARC Subfield Desc Contents for Shared Print a Action completeness reviewed c Time/Date of Action Date review was completed (YYYYMMDD) f Authorization Archiving program eg WEST, CRL JSTOR, CIC SPR i Method of Action Validation level ( volume-level, issue-level, pagelevel ) l Status Completeness problems ( missing, reprints, binding patterns vary ) z Public Note Specify the completeness problem, followed by the units to which it applies. For example, z missing volume 13 (1937). Use a separate Status/Note pair for different statuses.

44 583 Action Note for Condition Reviewed If no validation was done, you do not need this 583 Subfield MARC Subfield Desc Contents for Shared Print a Action condition reviewed c Time/Date of Action Date review was completed (YYYYMMDD) f Authorization Archiving program eg WEST, CRL JSTOR, CIC SPR i Method of Action Validation level ( volume-level, issue-level, pagelevel ) l Status Condition problems ( torn pages, highlighting/underlining ) z Public Note Specify the condition problem, followed by the units to which it applies. For example, z torn pages vol 27 issue 3. Use a separate Status/Note pair for different statuses.

45 Sample Completeness & Condition Record

46 Group Access Capability Establish Group Access Capability (GAC) profile for the print archiving program (e.g. WEST, Orbis-Cascade Alliance Distributed Print Repository, UC Shared Print). Facilitates borrowing and lending within and between institutions affiliated and not affiliated with archiving programs Facilitates local and group collection management decisions.

47 Group Catalog If desired, establish a Group Catalog for the print archiving program (e.g. WEST, Orbis-Cascade Alliance Distributed Print Repository, CIC Shared Print Repository) Allows staff and users affiliated (and not affiliated) with a print archiving program to view aggregated holdings and to search for either aggregate holdings or individual titles within a print archiving program. Supports inter-institutional visibility of resources subject to a shared print commitment (and their archived status) and to an individual library s collection management decisions.

48 Initial Implementation Steps for a Shared Print Program LHR metadata Request new symbol(s) and authorization(s) by to orders@oclc.org Establish common vocabulary for use in the 583 fields (e.g. retention period, archiving program name, condition terminology) Set up LHR batch load (if applicable) Resource-sharing Set up lending information for the new symbol in the OCLC Policies Directory Change the symbol from Non-supplier to Supplier Add new shared print symbols to custom holdings groups and paths Discovery Set up Group Access Capability and Group Catalogs (if desired)

49 Implementation Costs No charge to define new OCLC Symbols, but there may be related transaction charges for activity under that symbol One-time setup fee per library to define new LHR batch load process for new symbol (est $500) Using ILLIAD: If the library is supporting more than one OCLC symbol with the same instance of ILLiad, there is an additional satellite library fee ($1,200 per year). Using WCRS: Libraries may subscribe to WorldCat Resource- Sharing (WCRS) to process lending under the new symbol ($100 per year)

50 The bottom line Print archiving commitments not effectively disclosed in union catalogs are not delivering full benefit We must strike a balance between the desirability of detailed condition & completeness information and the need to achieve scale in the data resource Existing infrastructure of 583 Action Note and Local Holdings Records appears adequate for near term implementation and evaluation

51 Thank you. More questions? Contact us: Constance Malpas Lizanne Payne OCLC Print Archives Disclosure Pilot Final Report