Library Digital Resources: Relational Databases or Catalogues? (A Short Tutorial)

With the rush to deploy Information Technology in all service areas, there is tremendous pressure on small and medium size (around 1 lakh holdings) libraries in India to digitize their records. In doing so, Librarians wishing to go digital face the risk of opting for platforms and back-ends not truly designed for managing library records. The fact that designers of almost all Library Management Systems currently popular, have opted for the Relational Database model in structuring library data, further confounds the Librarian's choice and almost always leads to the deployment of inappropriate tools. This article (tutorial) argues that Library records cannot be conveniently cast in the conventional RDBMS framework without significant modifications to the structures of Library data as librarians have conventionally structured it, as well as key concepts in conventional RDBMS. It is the premise of this article that these modifications can be made only at the risk of seriously detracting from the effectiveness of the tools as well as the quality of the data. The premise here is that Library data are not relational databases but catalogs in the sense that they cannot be normalized to fit the canonical normal forms. An alternative framework of tools (WWWISIS back-end from the ISIS family) and structured data (ISO 8059) is suggested and explained

The NASA Astrophysics Data System: Architecture

The powerful discovery capabilities available in the ADS bibliographic services are possible thanks to the design of a flexible search and retrieval system based on a relational database model. Bibliographic records are stored as a corpus of structured documents containing fielded data and metadata, while discipline-specific knowledge is segregated in a set of files independent of the bibliographic data itself. The creation and management of links to both internal and external resources associated with each bibliography in the database is made possible by representing them as a set of document properties and their attributes. To improve global access to the ADS data holdings, a number of mirror sites have been created by cloning the database contents and software on a variety of hardware and software platforms. The procedures used to create and manage the database and its mirrors have been written as a set of scripts that can be run in either an interactive or unsupervised fashion. The ADS can be accessed at http://adswww.harvard.eduComment: 25 pages, 8 figures, 3 table

Report of the Stanford Linked Data Workshop

The Stanford University Libraries and Academic Information Resources (SULAIR) with the Council on Library and Information Resources (CLIR) conducted at week-long workshop on the prospects for a large scale, multi-national, multi-institutional prototype of a Linked Data environment for discovery of and navigation among the rapidly, chaotically expanding array of academic information resources. As preparation for the workshop, CLIR sponsored a survey by Jerry Persons, Chief Information Architect emeritus of SULAIR that was published originally for workshop participants as background to the workshop and is now publicly available. The original intention of the workshop was to devise a plan for such a prototype. However, such was the diversity of knowledge, experience, and views of the potential of Linked Data approaches that the workshop participants turned to two more fundamental goals: building common understanding and enthusiasm on the one hand and identifying opportunities and challenges to be confronted in the preparation of the intended prototype and its operation on the other. In pursuit of those objectives, the workshop participants produced:1. a value statement addressing the question of why a Linked Data approach is worth prototyping;2. a manifesto for Linked Libraries (and Museums and Archives and …);3. an outline of the phases in a life cycle of Linked Data approaches;4. a prioritized list of known issues in generating, harvesting & using Linked Data;5. a workflow with notes for converting library bibliographic records and other academic metadata to URIs;6. examples of potential “killer apps” using Linked Data: and7. a list of next steps and potential projects.This report includes a summary of the workshop agenda, a chart showing the use of Linked Data in cultural heritage venues, and short biographies and statements from each of the participants

Enhancing Scholarly Publications: Developing Hybrid Monographs in the Humanities and Social Sciences

Enhancing publications has a long history but is gaining acceleration as authors and publishers explore electronic tablets as devices for dissemination and presentation. Enhancement of scholarly publications, in contrast, more often takes place in a Web environment and is coupled with presentation of supplementary materials related to research. The approach to enhancing scholarly publications presented in this article goes a step further and involves the interlinking of the “objects” of a document: datasets, supplementary materials, secondary analyses, and post-publication interventions. This approach connects the user-centricity of Web 2.0 with the Semantic Web. It aims at facilitating long-term content structure through standardized formats intended to improve interoperability between concepts and terms within and across knowledge domains. We explored this conception of enhancement on a small set of books prepared for traditional academic publishers. While the project was primarily an exercise in development, the conclusion section of the article reflects on areas where conceptual and empirical studies could be initiated to complement this new direction in scholarly publishing.&nbsp

Union Catalogs at the Crossroad

The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and the National Library of Estonia organized a Conference on Union Catalogs which took place in Tallinn, in the National Library of Estonia on October 17-19, 2002. The Conference presented and discussed analytical papers dealing with various aspects of designing and implementing union catalogs and shared cataloging systems as revealed through the experiences of Eastern European, Baltic and South African research libraries. Here you can find the texts of the conference papers and the list of contributors and participants

LIS Journals\u27 Lack of Participation in Wikidata Item Creation

There are many items in Wikidata representing scholarly articles. However, these items have been created mostly by volunteer Wikidata editors and not systematically by journal publishers or editors, which can lead to gaps and inconsistencies in the datasets. This article presents findings from a survey investigating practices of library and information studies (LIS) journals in Wikidata item creation. Believing that a significant number of LIS journal editors would be aware of Wikidata and some would be creating Wikidata items for their publications, the authors sent a survey asking 138 English-language LIS journal editors if they created Wikidata items for materials published in their journal and follow-up questions. With a response rate of 41 percent, respondents overwhelmingly indicated that they did not create Wikidata items for materials published in their journal and were completely unaware of or only somewhat familiar with Wikidata. Respondents indicated that more familiarity with Wikidata and its benefits for scholarly journals as well as institutional support for the creation of Wikidata items could lead to greater participation; however, a campaign of education about Wikidata, documentation of benefits, and support for creation would be a necessary first step. The article presents and discusses the results of the survey, but the conclusions that can be drawn are minimal; therefore, the authors also discuss the benefits of creating Wikidata items for LIS journals as a first step in this educational campaign for editors and publishers

Mapping Scholarly Communication Infrastructure: A Bibliographic Scan of Digital Scholarly Communication Infrastructure

This bibliography scan covers a lot of ground. In it, I have attempted to capture relevant recent literature across the whole of the digital scholarly communications infrastructure. I have used that literature to identify significant projects and then document them with descriptions and basic information. Structurally, this review has three parts. In the first, I begin with a diagram showing the way the projects reviewed fit into the research workflow; then I cover a number of topics and functional areas related to digital scholarly communication. I make no attempt to be comprehensive, especially regarding the technical literature; rather, I have tried to identify major articles and reports, particularly those addressing the library community. The second part of this review is a list of projects or programs arranged by broad functional categories. The third part lists individual projects and the organizations—both commercial and nonprofit—that support them. I have identified 206 projects. Of these, 139 are nonprofit and 67 are commercial. There are 17 organizations that support multiple projects, and six of these—Artefactual Systems, Atypon/Wiley, Clarivate Analytics, Digital Science, Elsevier, and MDPI—are commercial. The remaining 11—Center for Open Science, Collaborative Knowledge Foundation (Coko), LYRASIS/DuraSpace, Educopia Institute, Internet Archive, JISC, OCLC, OpenAIRE, Open Access Button, Our Research (formerly Impactstory), and the Public Knowledge Project—are nonprofit.Andrew W. Mellon Foundatio

Bibliographic Control in the Digital Ecosystem

With the contributions of international experts, the book aims to explore the new boundaries of universal bibliographic control. Bibliographic control is radically changing because the bibliographic universe is radically changing: resources, agents, technologies, standards and practices. Among the main topics addressed: library cooperation networks; legal deposit; national bibliographies; new tools and standards (IFLA LRM, RDA, BIBFRAME); authority control and new alliances (Wikidata, Wikibase, Identifiers); new ways of indexing resources (artificial intelligence); institutional repositories; new book supply chain; “discoverability” in the IIIF digital ecosystem; role of thesauri and ontologies in the digital ecosystem; bibliographic control and search engines