LinkedIn emplea cookies para mejorar la funcionalidad y el rendimiento de nuestro sitio web, así como para ofrecer publicidad relevante. Si continúas navegando por ese sitio web, aceptas el uso de cookies. Consulta nuestras Condiciones de uso y nuestra Política de privacidad para más información.
LinkedIn emplea cookies para mejorar la funcionalidad y el rendimiento de nuestro sitio web, así como para ofrecer publicidad relevante. Si continúas navegando por ese sitio web, aceptas el uso de cookies. Consulta nuestra Política de privacidad y nuestras Condiciones de uso para más información.
With the continuing exponential growth of electronic resources in the past ten years, the ability to track electronic journal movement and changes from publisher to publisher has been a nightmare for librarians and other staff who work with these electronic journals. There has also been an increase in the movement of electronic journals between publishers making this a major issue for those w ork ing with electronic journals . Problems arising from journals changing publishers are currently principal sources of frustration, dissatisfaction and debate between publishers and librarians and even between publishers themselves. For example, as the Electronic Resources Librarian at Wayne State University, investigating electronic journal access issues is a primary job responsibility. When an electronic journal title changes publisher, the journal URL link can break causing problems with accessing the title. There can also be problems with incomplete subscription holdings and post cancellation access when the title transfers. When these things happen, it can cause severe disruption to the end user and patron. The electronic journals industry continu es to develop and intensify in its growth. It is necessary and sometimes crucial for librarians to get this information communicated to them so that they can provide essential uninterrupted access and service to their patrons.
Both the Transferring Publisher and the Receiving Publisher have roles in complying with the code. Using “reasonable efforts to ensure that the new contract are consistent with the code and is not intended to be implemented in a manner that would require either party to Engage in conduct prohibited by law. With access to the title, the transferring publisher is to provide access to the title until the receiving publisher is able to provide access to it Digital Content files will be made available from the transferring pub to the receiving pub within a certain time frame Subscription lists will be made available from transferring publisher to receiving pub. Receiving pub will contact current customers with updated lists The transferring pub will provide the URL to the receiving pub or put a redirect in place Both the transferring pub and the receiving pub will make reasonable efforts to communicate the information about the transfer to the customers If DOI names have been assigned, both the transferring pub and the receiving pub will follow relevant guidelines established by the appropriate registration agencies ** more details about these are available on the transfer website and in the code document
I talked a bit at the beginning about Best Practices and them being an “industry wide consensus”. Best practices, like transfer, help to take us
Participate of course! Publishers that are thinking of adopting the code can look to dedicated current participating publishers for guidance in the areas of: Timelines, communication ideas (listservs, email blasts, website information, the transfer blog and transfer lists) they can take a look at how pubs have handled transfers
The transfer working group is hard at work with continuing to address the challenges relating to title transfers Transfer has already affected the industry in a roundabout way. This initiative has increased awareness of the need for publishers to let libraries know how they are updating their products. Almost every major publisher that provides electronic resource content has changed or altered their online websites and content in the past few years. Many of them have been keen enough to realize that the changes they make affect the libraries, patrons and users in extraordinary ways. Transfer was the beginning of creating this necessity for letting consumers know that changes are on the way.
UKSG Transfer Update (2011 CrossRef Workshops)
UKSG TRANSFER Code of Practice A collaborative project to improve journal transfers
Librarians’ perspective: <ul><li>Keeping track of e-journal movement is a nightmare for librarians </li></ul><ul><li>Access issues continue to be problematic </li></ul><ul><li>Timing is crucial </li></ul><ul><li>Archival/Perpetual Access is essential </li></ul>
How common? <ul><li>A case study: </li></ul><ul><li>In 2007 EBSCO logged 2,667 unique titles that moved from one publisher to another. </li></ul><ul><li>2,667 titles moving between publishers required EBSCO to make 20,000-25,000 changes to their title file. </li></ul>
TRANSFER Goals <ul><li>Ensure that journal content remains easily accessible by librarians and readers when there is a journal transfer </li></ul><ul><li>Ensure that the transfer process occurs with minimum disruption </li></ul><ul><li>Establish explicit obligations for Transferring Publishers and Receiving Publishers </li></ul><ul><li>Establish best practice to help publishers be more efficient </li></ul><ul><li>Get publishers, librarians, agents and others to work together better </li></ul>
Overview of code <ul><li>Access to the title </li></ul><ul><li>Digital Content Files </li></ul><ul><li>Subscription Lists </li></ul><ul><li>Journal URL </li></ul><ul><li>Communication </li></ul><ul><li>DOI name ownership </li></ul>
Transfer Working Group <ul><li>Elsevier, Springer, SAGE Publications, Oxford University Press, Nature Publishing Group, John Wiley & Sons </li></ul><ul><li>Kingston University, Georgia Institute of Technology, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, University of Hertfordshire </li></ul><ul><li>Content Complete, Ringgold, Swets Information Services </li></ul><ul><li>Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers, CrossRef </li></ul>
Current Status <ul><li>Code 2.0 released end of 2008 </li></ul><ul><li>36 publishers signed up – including Elsevier, Nature, OUP, Sage, Springer, T&F, Wiley-Blackwell </li></ul><ul><li>~10,000 journals covered </li></ul><ul><li>Impact with publishers behind the scenes </li></ul><ul><li>Launching new notification service </li></ul>
Transfer Alerting Services <ul><li>Central location for publishers to register basic data about a transfer as soon as contracts are signed </li></ul><ul><li>Minimal data, available to all </li></ul><ul><li>Available via email and blog - http://www.uksg.org/transfer/notifications </li></ul><ul><li>Hundreds of Transfers announced – big jump from September 2010 </li></ul>
Working Toward <ul><li>Communication is key! </li></ul><ul><li>Seamless data exchange between publishers, data providers, third-party hosts, subscription agents, knowledge bases, and libraries </li></ul>
What can publishers do? <ul><li>Participate! </li></ul><ul><li>Publicly endorse your involvement </li></ul><ul><li>Participating publishers can give guidance to new adopters </li></ul><ul><li>Work with libraries that want compliance in licenses </li></ul>
Work that still needs to be done <ul><li>More publishers need to endorse the Code </li></ul><ul><li>More involvement from societies </li></ul><ul><li>Launch Enhanced Alerting Service </li></ul><ul><li>Revise the Code based on experience </li></ul><ul><li>Checking compliance </li></ul>
Transfer Website <ul><li>UKSG Transfer </li></ul><ul><li>http://www.uksg.org/transfer </li></ul><ul><li>Code version 2.0 </li></ul><ul><li>Supplementary Materials </li></ul><ul><li>Communications Guidelines </li></ul><ul><li>Information about the Working Group </li></ul>
Going forward <ul><li>Collaborative, rather than punitive, approach is best…unless it doesn ’ t work </li></ul><ul><li>Keep focus on benefits to readers of online journals and customers </li></ul><ul><li>Learn from COUNTER – steady progress with lots of consultation; moved from informal to more formal </li></ul>