2011 Emerging Leaders: Group C Improving ALA Poster Sessions. Final Report and Recommendations Date Submitted: Monday, May 16 th, 2011

Transcription

1 2011 Emerging Leaders: Group C Improving ALA Poster Sessions Final Report and Recommendations Date Submitted: Monday, May 16 th, 2011 Amanda Harlan, Ben Hunter, Ariel eff, Thomas Reinsfelder, Kristen Yarmey Introduction: The ALA Poster Committee is interested in implementing an improved system for managing and reviewing poster session proposals. The Poster Committee is also interested in investigating software systems that would allow posters from the ALA Annual Conference to be digitally published and viewed online. Group C was charged with researching and analyzing eposter products and making recommendations to the Poster Committee. Key phases of the group s work included: Gathering information and clarifying requirements from the ALA Poster Committee and ALA IT staff Compiling a list of requirements and features desired in an eposter system Identifying possible eposter systems Evaluating the capabilities of each eposter system Selecting the top three eposter systems and arranging product demonstrations Gathering input and feedback from group members Recommending an eposter system to the ALA Poster Committee Recommendation: The group believes that an eposter system capable of integrating with existing systems like ALA Connect would best support the ALA Poster Committee s workflow and archiving of digital posters. For Abstract Submission and Review Group C recommends making use of ensync s Abstract Manager system that was recently purchased by ALA. For Digital Publishing of posters Group C recommends the following eposter system: Product ame Review Form Vendor Cost SPLtrak eposter System ( Review form in Appendix B (see for product details) SPLtrak ( $1,000 setup fee per abstract/poster Additional services or customization may lead to increased costs Rationale: Group C recommends the purchase of SPLtrak s eposter Systems digital publishing module. ALA already has an abstract management system from ensync that includes submission and review workflows for both conference and poster presentations. The ability to upload poster files and view them online is what ALA currently needs to create a complete eposter system that includes submission, review, file upload, and online publishing in a digital archive. 1

2 ith this in mind, the group focused on systems that allowed for individual purchasing of various modules, specifically file upload and online publishing modules. This focus narrowed the original list of products (see Appendix A for the complete list of products) down to the top three products the group carefully evaluated: SPLtrak s eposter Systems, Interactive Attendee s eposter Module, and eocode s Digital Poster Management System. The digital publishing module of SPLtrak s eposter system became the top choice for several reasons: its relative maturity compared to similar products on the market; its compatibility with already existing ALA technology; its flexibility with customizable features; the simplicity of its functionality; its ability to upload poster files from other abstract management systems; and its reasonable cost. FILE COMPATIBILITY & COVERSIO: Virtually any file format accepted (most common file formats used are Microsoft PowerPoint (PPT) and portable document format (PDF)). Real-time conversion of poster submission files. Instant poster submission preview. POSTER VIEER: Controlled access to eposter viewer (e.g., public access or open to registrants only). Browse/search poster submissions based on any collected criteria (e.g., subject category, author). Built-in dynamic poster viewer that permits zoom and panning of poster. Contact options for direct communication between poster viewer and author(s). ARCHIVE Currently SPLtrak does not do file conversion for long-term preservation, but is open to incorporating it into their services if deemed important enough by ALA. Most common practice among SPLtrak s customers is to have posters remain available online for up to one year after conference. SPLtrak can continue making posters available online after one year for a nominal fee. Digital files can be transferred to ALA for hosting at any time in a variety of formats. SPLtrak can create online flip books of posters as an option for long-term digital preservation. Other Products Reviewed Attendee Interactive - e-poster Module Product ame Review Form Vendor Initial Cost e-poster Module ( Review form in Appendix C (see for product details) Attendee Interactive ( Dependent on how many completed submissions there are. 2

3 The group s second choice was Attendee Interactive s e-poster Module. hile there were similarities with SPLtrak s eposter system, the group felt the functionality of the e-poster module was not as user-friendly or intuitive to use. Another drawback was that the module only provided a link to a poster and did not offer enhanced viewing abilities like pan and zoom. Although this is not the group s first choice, this product could be an acceptable option for ALA. eocode - Digital Poster Management System Product ame Digital Poster Management System ( Review Form Review form in Appendix C (see for product details) Vendor eocode Software ( Initial Cost $2,000 annual fee = unlimited conferences with up to 1000 posters/conference - if conferences are scheduled, archive hosting is free, if not, archival is $180/conference/year The group s third choice was eocode s Digital Poster Management System. The biggest drawback of this product is the requirement to create digital posters within their system. eocode does not allow presenters to upload files. e believe ALA members and presenters would view this process as an unnecessary burden. Additionally, many features desired by the group would require customization of the software. Open Source Options Open source products have gained in popularity over the last decade, especially in the library sector. One reason is the similarity in their philosophies, which focuses around free and open access pertaining to open source s software and libraries information. Additionally, open source enables the library sector to become a leading innovator by developing and customizing their own products/tools. Though there are many open source products libraries use from integrated library systems (Evergreen) to citation tools (Zotero) to institutional repositories (IRs) (DSpace and Fedora), what type of open source product would best fit the needs of an eposter system? After much discussion and research, the group focused on open source institutional repositories and conference management systems as possible eposter system candidates. After reviewing several products (CDS Invenio, DLXS, DSpace, Fedora, Greenstone, and Open Conference Systems), the group found none of them met all the required and desired functional requirements established by the group for an eposter system. Additionally, though open source products are free, they need a lot of attention by local staff for customization, maintenance, and troubleshooting purposes. The group felt this was another drawback and that a system hosted by a company that can offer support and additional services would be preferable. For these two reasons, open source products were quickly dropped from the list of possible candidates to recommend to ALA. Attachments Original list of possible products for eposter systems (Appendix A) Functional Requirement Review Forms for: SPLtrak eposter System (Appendix B) Attendee Interactive e-poster Module (Appendix C) eocode Digital Poster Management System (Appendix D) 3

4 Appendix A List of Possible Products for eposters Commercial Conference eproducts: ALA Abstract Manager System (ensync) Attendee Interactive eposter Module Event Infotech epresenter eocode Conference Management SPLtrak eposter System Trapeze Media Solutions Open Source Conference eproducts: Open Conference Systems Commercial Institutional Repositories: Digital Commons (Berkeley Electronic Press) Insight (Luna Imaging, Inc.) Open Source Institutional Repositories: CDS Invenio (formerly CDSware) DLXS DSpace Fedora Commons Greenstone 4

5 Appendix B Functional Requirements Review Form SPLtrak eposter System ecessary ()/ otes Abstract Submission anted () (provided by representative of SPLtrak) Is the interface user-friendly? Viable Is there a fill-in form capability o, not in our normal system. e can always where poster presenters can customize it to work that way, but that is an supply their own contact additional and often significant charge. information metadata? Can ALA specify their own e can collect any information/fields that you metadata fields? wish. Abstract Review/Approval Can multiple reviewers log in to Yes. Really no limit. view an abstract? Can reviewers leave feedback on Yes, scores, comments, etc. e can create a an abstract (e.g., a score)? custom scoresheet that they complete. Can automated messages be sent to presenter after approval/rejection? Can the product send an automated reminder for the presenter to upload their poster after the conference? Poster Submission Yes, we can send out acceptance/rejection letters. Yes, we can do that. Is the interface user-friendly? Yes, very easy to understand. Can presenter upload poster *after* abstract is submitted? hat file formats are allowed? Are multiple file submissions allowed? Is multimedia (video, audio) supported? Can posters be cataloged into different sections (e.g., by conference, by topic )? Can ALA add text/form re: copyright issues and publication rights? hat is the maximum storage space allowed? Yes, that is the normal way it happens. Most people don t have their poster until a few days before the conference. The three major formats are PowerPoint, JPEG, and PDF. e usually permit OE poster/file per abstract. However, some groups will also collect an audio file. e can do that, they would be separate uploads. Yes, by any data we have. n/a o real max. e will provide whatever space is needed. 5

6 Poster Publishing Is the interface user-friendly? Yes. Can posters be easily panned/zoomed? Yes. Can posters be easily searched by all fields? (author, full text, category, keyword ) Yes. Are files hosted by product vendor? Yes. Can access be restricted (e.g., to conference attendees/ala Connect members only?) Yes. Poster Preservation Does the product support longterm preservation of the posters? hat file formats are supported for long-term preservation? Other hat is the cost of the product? One-time or annual? Does the vendor do any search engine optimization? How Googleable would the posters be? Can the product connect to ALA Connect? Can data be shared via a web service, (API) or XML feed for use in our Conference Scheduler? Does the product support OAI- PMH metadata harvesting? How much support would ALA IT have to provide? Can metadata be exported should ALA decide to use another product in the future (or if they're going to be abstracted by EBSCO)? e don t do file conversion for longtime preservation. At least we don t currently do it. Most groups want the posters to stay in our system and then that is it. Posters tend to be meant for temporary display and often our systems will assure authors that they will only be available for X number of months. e do create online flip books of conference programs, etc. That may be an option if you do need them permanent. n/a Abstract Collection & Review: $1000 setup + $5 for each abstract (up to 2500) Uploading Files $7 per abstract E-posters $1000 setup + $4 per abstract e usually BLOCK goggle. e do this for conference websites, but never for program content. Depending on the size of your system, we can help your programmers pass certain data that will integrate the two systems. e tend to only do this for larger systems e would need more technical info to answer that. e are open to pretty much any options on our end. ot directly, but we can export data in basically any format. Usually we handle all support directly related to our systems. e can export the data in a variety of formats. You also have real-time download ability. 6

7 Abstract Submission Is the interface user-friendly? Is there a fill-in form capability where poster presenters can supply their own contact information metadata? Can ALA specify their own metadata fields? Abstract Review/Approval Can multiple reviewers log in to view an abstract? Appendix C Functional Requirements Review Form Attendee Interactive e-poster Module ecessary () / anted () otes Interface is customizable in terms of workflows and search screens Yes, they can do either a structured submission form where you have text boxes where you can paste from other products or you can do a topic submission where it is choice you have to make. You can also do a combination of both which is the most common. Yes, we can specify what fields we want. Yes, just need an admin to assign submissions to reviewers or can be done automatically by grouping through categories or expertise area. Yes, reviewers can provide feedback about a submission. Yes, templates can be set up anywhere in the process and be automatically sent to whoever it needs to go to. Can reviewers leave feedback on an abstract (e.g., a score)? Can automated messages be sent to presenter after approval/rejection? Can the product send an automated reminder for the Yes, it has the option to send reminder s presenter to upload their poster to both the submitters and the reviewers. after the conference? Poster Submission Yes, the interface would be the same as the Is the interface user-friendly? abstract submission. Can presenter upload poster Yes, this system has the option of assigning *after* abstract is submitted? deadlines. hat file formats are allowed? Any file format is allowed Are multiple file submissions Yes, one can submit multiple files as long as allowed? the workflow is setup to take that. Is multimedia (video, audio) Video and audio are supported. supported? Can posters be cataloged into Yes the system has an option of creating different sections (e.g., by categories or subjects that posters can be conference, by topic )? assigned under. Can ALA add text/form re: copyright issues and publication rights? hat is the maximum storage space allowed? Yes ALA can add a disclosure statement, etc. where it is deemed necessary within the workflow. There is no maximum limit for storage space. 7

8 Poster Publishing Is the interface user-friendly? Yes, very simple for user to peruse a poster. Can posters be easily Uses Adobe Reader and Flash if necessary to panned/zoomed? zoom and pan. Can posters be easily searched Yes, you can customize your search screen to by all fields? (author, full text, be only keyword or of multiple search options category, keyword ) like title, author, category. Are files hosted by product Yes, system is hosted and maintained by vendor? vendor. Can access be restricted (e.g., to conference attendees/ala Connect members only?) Yes, access can be restricted. Poster Preservation Does the product support longterm preservation of the posters? hat file formats are supported for long-term preservation? Other hat is the cost of the product? One-time or annual? Does the vendor do any search engine optimization? How Googleable would the posters be? Can the product connect to ALA Connect? Does the product support OAI- PMH metadata harvesting? How much support would ALA IT have to provide? Can metadata be exported should ALA decide to use another product in the future (or if they're going to be abstracted by EBSCO)? Since they are hosting the product, I think they are more concerned about getting submissions and showing them rather than digital preservation. They said most of their clients submit PDFs and PPs for the poster files. Annual license fee includes one setup, charge for training (4hrs online), $125 per month for hosting. Based on completed submissions (Ex. Under 1000 submissions $7500). They can add the google indexing if we want it. Yes, just depends on how we want it to be used in ALA Connect. ork with ALA IT on this. Yes, it has the option to do OAI-PMH harvesting. one, unless it had something to do with the branding of the workflows or how they want things to show up, etc., in terms of website aesthetics. Yes, though they have never had a client do this yet. 8

9 Additional Miscellaneous otes Create a Profile: can use an ALA username and pw, or can do new, or both. ill help with creating workflows for submission, review, and post Skin/Layouts of workflow are customized Can provide a tutorial on how to use the system. Structured Submission and topic submission available, can mix aspects of both. Categories can select multiple or only one Can support multiple types of file formats in addition to the poster presentation. Have a maximum character count for the abstract. Can do a do an evalution questionaire anytime with the system. System automatically saves what you type do not have to manually save. Can do deadlines for certain parts of the workflow. Shows what is incomplete if the form wasn t completely filled out. Sends an automatic to people for each workflow Can hide the person s name for an unbiased review. System can either automatically assign submissions to a reviewer(s) or manually do it. Automatic s for denials and acceptances Have the ability to lock down a presentation. Completely hosted and maintained by Accelebrate ork with ALA IT team to connect with ALA Connect Can provide turn-key solutions at the conference to deliver the poster content to the attendees through the attendee search interface Search results show alphabetically by title (default) Option to get a PDF copy of a poster Search interface does not offer facets on the search result page to narrow results down. Adobe Reader or Flash used to zoom in or play with. Results can be organized by author, title, however. Deploy instances of the software Have stats for searching o restrictions between workflows. Admin interface intuitively easy to use Has multiple tools on the admin side. Default page of admin side is the dashboard. Do license the modules separately from the whole system if we only want the post-publishing one and not the submission or reviewing module since ALA's Abstract Management System does that. Are checking on whether they can incorporate Shibboleth Authentication into their system for login purposes. 9

10 Appendix D Functional Requirements Review Form eocode Digital Poster Management System Abstract Submission ecessary () / anted () otes Is the interface user-friendly? A - Abstract only submission would be a customizable feature - poster design approval is what comes out of the box Is there a fill-in form capability where poster presenters can supply their own contact information custom metadata? Can ALA specify their own metadata fields? yes totally custom Abstract Review/Approval Can multiple reviewers log in to view an abstract? yes - no versioning Can reviewers leave feedback on an abstract (e.g., a score)? yes Can automated messages be sent to presenter after yes approval/rejection? Can the product send an automated reminder for the presenter to upload posters must be made in the module their poster after the conference? Poster Submission Is the interface user-friendly? yes, very clear Can presenter upload poster *after* abstract is submitted? hat file formats are allowed? Are multiple file submissions allowed? Is multimedia (video, audio) supported? Can posters be cataloged into different sections (e.g., by conference, by topic )? Can ALA add text/form re: copyright issues and publication rights? hat is the maximum storage space allowed? posters cannot be uploaded, must be made in module, but yes, poster can be made after the abstract is approved no uploads of finished posters (they are created in html) no file submissions yes! Quicktime and MPEG1 for video; all images must be jpeg or gif files yes, searching is easy - drop down menu style yes none - videos must be smaller than 3 min 10

11 Poster Publishing Is the interface user-friendly? yes, very clean and easy Can posters be easily panned/zoomed? Can posters be easily searched by all fields? (author, full text, category, keyword ) all posters are sized according to our specifications, usual monitor zoom works, images can be clicked and viewed larger yes - searching is optimized for terminal stations, so no keyboard is required to search Are files hosted by product vendor? yes Can access be restricted (e.g., to yes - passwords and logins can be pulled conference attendees/ala Connect from ALA Connect members only?) Poster Preservation Does the product support longterm preservation of the posters? hat file formats are supported for long-term preservation? Other hat is the cost of the product? One-time or annual? Does the vendor do any search engine optimization? How Googleable would the posters be? Can the product connect to ALA Connect? Does the product support OAI-PMH metadata harvesting? How much support would ALA IT have to provide? Can metadata be exported should ALA decide to use another product in the future (or if they're going to be abstracted by EBSCO)? yes, all archived conferences are saved and searchable; we can have our data if we switch providers html $2,000 annual fee = unlimited conferences with up to 1000 posters/conference - if conferences are schedule, archive hosting is free, if not, archival is $180/conference/year they have lots of options for metadata - not sure about google, especially if we have it behind a password Definitely, in multiple ways - customization is always welcome It could - he looked at the xml for that and said it would work minimal - enough to get ALA Connect to play nice Yes in html Additional Miscellaneous otes This product seemed like a viable option. The admin interface is very easy to navigate, and the public side can be customized as desired. Very clean and easy to search. All fields in the posters are searchable. Poster MUST be created in the module. The program re-sizes posters according to the admin's standard. This is good for events using a monitor display on site. Poster templates can be enforced to keep a tight hold on branding for the conference if desired. Custom programming is encouraged. 11