This document discusses troubleshooting electronic resources using interlibrary loan data. It identifies three common problems: data being incomplete or inaccurate, bibliographic metadata and holdings data not being synchronized, and libraries receiving data in multiple formats. It provides examples of each problem, such as dates being inconsistent between sources and targets, metadata being searched incorrectly, and buried open access links. The document suggests using interlibrary loan data to identify and address these issues in order to improve access to electronic resources.
3. HOW CAN INTERLIBRARY
LOAN DATA HELP?
“ILL Cancellations: the indicator species of
the library . . . a species whose presence,
absence, or relative well-being in a given
environment is indicative of the health of its
ecosystem as a whole”
- Karen Janke, 2007
OCLC ILLiad International Meeting
5. TESTING ACCESS PATHS
• Test journal/book title access via library
catalog
• Test book/article/chapter title access via
library discovery layer
• Test book/article/chapter title access via
Google Scholar
6. WHAT KINDS OF PROBLEMS
WERE IDENTIFIED?
Three core problems:
• Data are incomplete or inaccurate.
• Bibliographic metadata and holdings data
are not synchronized.
• Libraries receive data in multiple formats.
7. DATE INCONSISTENCIES
BETWEEN SOURCE AND
TARGET
Problem: Data are
incomplete or
inaccurate
Source Date:
December 2007
dddd-dd
Link Resolver Date:
January 1, 2007
dddd-dd-dd
Date passed:
2007
Target Date:
January 1, 2007
dddd-dd-dd
Date
passed:
January
1, 2007
Article not found
because no such
article/page
number exists in
the January 2007
issue.
8. CORRECT METADATA
SEARCHED INCORRECTLY
Problem: Data are
incomplete or
inaccurate
Source Enumeration:
Issue 2
Link Resolver Enumeration:
Issue 2
Enumeration passed:
Issue 2
Target Enumeration:
v. 2
Enumeration
passed:
Issue 2 Article not found
because no such
volume exists for
this journal and
the search fails.
20. WHERE ELSE CAN THE
DATA TAKE US?
• Library instruction/outreach
• More partnership with ILL
• Interface design
• New ideas about handling open access and
print holdings
• Great training for knowledgebases and link
resolvers
21. REFERENCES
Ashmore, B., Allee , E. and Wood, R. (2015) Identifying and
Troubleshooting Link-Resolution Issues with ILL Data, Serials
Review, 41:1, 23-29, DOI: 10.1080/00987913.2014.1001506
Kemperman, S. S., Brembeck, B., Brown, E. W., de Lange-van
Oosten, A., Fons, T., Giffi, C., Levin, N., Morrison, A., Ruschoff,
C., Silvis, G. A., & White, J. (2014). Success strategies for
electronic content discovery and access: A cross-industry white
paper. Dublin, OH: OCLC. Retrieved from
http://www.oclc.org/content/dam/oclc/reports/data-
quality/215233-SuccessStrategies.pdf
Janke, K. L. (2007, March). The $64,000 question answered:
Why do patrons place ILL requests for items that the library
already owns? Paper presented at the OCLC ILLiad
International Meeting, Virginia Beach, VA. Retrieved from
https://scholarworks.iupui.edu/handle/1805/901?show=full
While the OCLC white paper focuses on synchronizing holdings data with rich bibliographic data in library discovery services managed by libraries, there are other sources of bibliographic data that users encounter that require the same level of synchronization. One example of such a resource is Google Scholar, which provides users with bibliographic data, a strong search algorithm, and, when customized by a participating library, links to a library link resolver via Google’s Library Links program. The librarians at the Samford University Library have trained users to look for those Fulltext@Samford links off to the right of the citations in Google Scholar, which is a popular tool among our faculty and students. Unfortunately, through the cancelled request notification process, we discovered that the Fulltext@Samford link was not off to the right where it should have been according to our knowledgebase data but instead was tucked under the More button underneath the citation, where it would have been if we did not have the article in our knowledgebase. The librarians considered that the titles in question might be new additions to the knowledgebase and therefore simply not communicated to Google yet for inclusion. However, as recently as August 2014, a citation with no Fulltext@Samford link was found by a user in Google Scholar for an article in a journal that the library has had in its knowledgebase for approximately 10 years. This ongoing problem is one that would be served by greater synchronicity between the metadata in Google Scholar and our library’s knowledgebase.
While the OCLC white paper focuses on synchronizing holdings data with rich bibliographic data in library discovery services managed by libraries, there are other sources of bibliographic data that users encounter that require the same level of synchronization. One example of such a resource is Google Scholar, which provides users with bibliographic data, a strong search algorithm, and, when customized by a participating library, links to a library link resolver via Google’s Library Links program. The librarians at the Samford University Library have trained users to look for those Fulltext@Samford links off to the right of the citations in Google Scholar, which is a popular tool among our faculty and students. Unfortunately, through the cancelled request notification process, we discovered that the Fulltext@Samford link was not off to the right where it should have been according to our knowledgebase data but instead was tucked under the More button underneath the citation, where it would have been if we did not have the article in our knowledgebase. The librarians considered that the titles in question might be new additions to the knowledgebase and therefore simply not communicated to Google yet for inclusion. However, as recently as August 2014, a citation with no Fulltext@Samford link was found by a user in Google Scholar for an article in a journal that the library has had in its knowledgebase for approximately 10 years. This ongoing problem is one that would be served by greater synchronicity between the metadata in Google Scholar and our library’s knowledgebase.
While the OCLC white paper focuses on synchronizing holdings data with rich bibliographic data in library discovery services managed by libraries, there are other sources of bibliographic data that users encounter that require the same level of synchronization. One example of such a resource is Google Scholar, which provides users with bibliographic data, a strong search algorithm, and, when customized by a participating library, links to a library link resolver via Google’s Library Links program. The librarians at the Samford University Library have trained users to look for those Fulltext@Samford links off to the right of the citations in Google Scholar, which is a popular tool among our faculty and students. Unfortunately, through the cancelled request notification process, we discovered that the Fulltext@Samford link was not off to the right where it should have been according to our knowledgebase data but instead was tucked under the More button underneath the citation, where it would have been if we did not have the article in our knowledgebase. The librarians considered that the titles in question might be new additions to the knowledgebase and therefore simply not communicated to Google yet for inclusion. However, as recently as August 2014, a citation with no Fulltext@Samford link was found by a user in Google Scholar for an article in a journal that the library has had in its knowledgebase for approximately 10 years. This ongoing problem is one that would be served by greater synchronicity between the metadata in Google Scholar and our library’s knowledgebase.
While the OCLC white paper focuses on synchronizing holdings data with rich bibliographic data in library discovery services managed by libraries, there are other sources of bibliographic data that users encounter that require the same level of synchronization. One example of such a resource is Google Scholar, which provides users with bibliographic data, a strong search algorithm, and, when customized by a participating library, links to a library link resolver via Google’s Library Links program. The librarians at the Samford University Library have trained users to look for those Fulltext@Samford links off to the right of the citations in Google Scholar, which is a popular tool among our faculty and students. Unfortunately, through the cancelled request notification process, we discovered that the Fulltext@Samford link was not off to the right where it should have been according to our knowledgebase data but instead was tucked under the More button underneath the citation, where it would have been if we did not have the article in our knowledgebase. The librarians considered that the titles in question might be new additions to the knowledgebase and therefore simply not communicated to Google yet for inclusion. However, as recently as August 2014, a citation with no Fulltext@Samford link was found by a user in Google Scholar for an article in a journal that the library has had in its knowledgebase for approximately 10 years. This ongoing problem is one that would be served by greater synchronicity between the metadata in Google Scholar and our library’s knowledgebase.