Carpenter, Todd

Thatcher, Sanford G.

English

Purdue E-Pubs

Against the GrainVolume 23 | Issue 2 Article 5April 2011The Challenges of Bibliographic Control andScholarly Integrity in an Online World of MultipleVersions of Journal ArticlesTodd CarpenterNISO, tcarpenter@niso.orgSanford G. ThatcherPenn State Press, sandy.thatcher@alumni.princeton.eduFollow this and additional works at: https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/atgPart of the Library and Information Science CommonsThis document has been made available through Purdue e-Pubs, a service of the Purdue University Libraries. Please contact epubs@purdue.edu foradditional information.Recommended CitationCarpenter, Todd and Thatcher, Sanford G. (2011) "The Challenges of Bibliographic Control and Scholarly Integrity in an OnlineWorld of Multiple Versions of Journal Articles," Against the Grain: Vol. 23: Iss. 2, Article 5.DOI: https://doi.org/10.7771/2380-176X.5782c/o Katina Strauch209 Richardson AvenueMSC 98, The CitadelCharleston, SC  29409“Linking Publishers, Vendors and Librarians”What To Look For In This Issue:Future of the Textbook – Part II ......36Is Selection Dead?  The Rise of Collection Management and the Twilight of Selection .........................40Libraries’ Strategic Stewardship of their Users’ Discovery Experience....46New Styles for Old Problems ............47InterviewsGlenda Alvin ......................................52Profiles EncouragedSanford G. Thatcher .........................32Mark Kendall.....................................34Glenda Alvin ......................................44Sue Polanka.......................................56Publisher Profile – IOP Publishing ...74Karen Watts .......................................83continued on page 14If Rumors Were Horsescontinued on page 6So far it has been a whirlwind spring opening.  Lots of sickness, lots of travel, lots of new initiatives. A couple of big items.  First the Google Book Settlement.  As we all know, Judge Den-ny Chin found that the Amended Settlement Agreement (ASA) is not fair, adequate, and reasonable.  Several noteworthy people have weighed in on this and many are quoted on the ATG NewsChannel.  www.against-the-grain.com/  I was interested in the recent article in the New York Times “Rul-ing Spurs Ef-fort to Form Digital Public Library” by Miguel Helft ( A p r i l  3 , 2011).  Many like Robert Darnton are energized, but I have to agree with Michael Keller when he says, the digital public library project “is coming late to the party. …It is still trying to figure out what it is and who it is… there is no prac-tical plan for getting it started.”  There is also no funding.  We have lost a lot of access and unless legislation is passed for orphan works, the Digital Public Library will have the same problem that Google had.  http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/04/technology/04library.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&src=recUKSG’s journal, Serials, will have a name change and new editors!  The new name — Insights: Connecting the knowledge com-munity — takes effect with volume 25, 2012. The new editors are Lorraine Estelle (Chief Executive of JISC Collections) and Steve Sharp (Resource Acquisition Team Leader at ISSN: 1043-2094MLA, SLA, BooK ExPo ISSUE TMvoLUME 23, NUMBER 2 APRIL 20111043-2094(201104)23:2;1-7The Challenges of Bibliographic Control and Scholarly Integrity in an Online World of Multiple Versions of Journal Articlesby Todd Carpenter  (Managing Director, NISO, One North Charles Street, Suite 1905,  Baltimore, MD  21201;  Phone: 301-654-2512;  Fax: 410-685-5278)   <tcarpenter@niso.org>  www.niso.orgby Sanford G. Thatcher  (Director Emeritus, Penn State Press, 8201 Edgewater Drive,  Frisco, TX  75034-5514;  Phone: 214-705-1939)  <sandy.thatcher@alumni.princeton.edu>What began as two separate efforts — to describe recent efforts at bringing the problem of multiple versions of articles under stronger bibliographic control and to confront the problems of multiple ver-sions for the integrity of scholarly practices raised by the widespread adoption of Green OA mandates — had the happy outcome of being combined when Katina Strauch suggested to us that our topics were closely enough related to be usefully joined in a co-edited special issue.  We think the articles we commissioned bear out her faith in this complementary relationship between the two subjects examined here.In a way, the second problem may be viewed as one special case of the more general challenges identified under the heading of the first problem.  The background for the latter is laid out broadly by Todd Carpenter in his survey of three major efforts at enhanced bib-liographic control — Journal Article Versions (NISo/ALPSP), Versions of Eprints (JISC), and the Version Identification Framework (JISC) — with JAV focusing on journal articles alone while the JISC projects expanded the scope to include “a broader range of content forms.”  Carol Anne Meyer describes how CrossMark, an extension of the CrossRef system, is being developed to build on the JAV initiative and extend it even further by using it for books as well as journals.  Lettie Conrad discusses the challenges that SAGE Publica-tions is facing in incorporating the JAV recom-mendations into its SAGE Journals online system hosted by HighWire Press.Stevan Harnad begins the second section by outlining the rationale for, and progress of, Green OA as his preferred strategy for moving STM publishing, and eventually all scholarly Thomas Mack Gremillion14 Against the Grain / April 2011 <http://www.against-the-grain.com>continued on page 44Wake Forest University.   He says he thinks he’s actually going to be able to (at least try to) do what he wants at Wake, which is give faculty (and students) a chance to publish their “stuff” online (for free), as opposed to the traditional way (for increasing fees).  He is planning on offering a tossed salad of self-publishing, open source, course materials, with some HTML5 dressing on the side.  Bill(y) says he’ll be working for the computing center and not the library, but libraries are likewise increasingly becoming content suppliers, and not just collectors.  So, he says he will still Rumorsfrom page 12The Challenges of Bibliographic ...from page 1publishing, in the direction of open access. With this framework he discusses how peer review, and to a lesser extent copyediting, will remain the only valuable functions that publishers will have reason to charge for in an OA environment.  Reflecting on his long experience as an STM journal copyeditor, Joe Fineman follows with an honest assess-ment of what kinds of service copyeditors can usefully continue to provide in an online publishing environment and what kinds may no longer justify the expense of providing. Building on these contributions, but focusing more on journal publishing in the humani-ties and social sciences, Sanford Thatcher reports the results of a collaborative effort by several university press copyeditors to assess the adequacy of Green OA versions (what in JAV’s terminology would be called “Accepted Manuscripts”) posted on Harvard’s DASH repository, comparing these as feasible with the final versions as published (JAV’s Versions of Record”).  One perhaps surprising result of this exercise is that much editing traditionally done for print-based journals, especially formatting to conform with house style, is unnecessary in an online environment, whereas types of edit-ing not typically now done for reasons of cost, such as checking of citations and quotations for accuracy, will become cheaper to perform and more important as contributions to scholarly integrity.  Under the Hood — New To YouColumn Editor:  xan Arch  (Collection Development Librarian, Reed College Library)  <xanadu@reed.edu>Libraries are still buying a lot of books. In a world where Google is available for the satisficing of our users, how do we make sure all these books are used?  Students, who may not yet be tapped into academic networks, need to learn about new resources in their field.  In the age of the electronic resource, print material is still valuable for learning and research.  We are buying books that the students and faculty will need and use right now.  The challenge is making sure they know what we are providing as soon as it’s available to them.One way libraries address this problem is by offering a list for patrons to view new materi-als purchased by the library in the last week or month.  This could be a great way to put our acquisitions in front of our users, but most of us aren’t doing a very good job at this feature. In many cases these lists are data dumps from the catalog, organized by LC class.  Because the list is often run from the ILS backend, it usually can’t take advantage of the additional features (like book jackets or reviews) that are present in next-generation catalogs.  Often, possibly due to the difficulties of formatting these lists attractively, the new materials list is hidden on a secondary layer of the Website. Some of these lists include the ability to set up new material notifications through RSS, but most of the lists are static and view-only. The new materials list is too valuable for this kind of treatment.  A basic new materials list, dumped from the catalog, organized by LC class, then hidden on a library Website is pretty near useless to accom-plish the goals of pushing our new content to our users.It isn’t easy to create a new materials list using just the library database software, so why isn’t there a vended solution to the new materials list?  A vendor could take care of the details of creating this list every week, leaving us the time to find new ways to reach our users.  It could be offered by an ILS company, but there are other vendors that know as much about the new materials we acquire as we do.  One possibility is the library’s main monograph vendor.  They would be able to provide a library with a new materials feed that could update at the very point when a book reached the library.  The list could incorporate reviews, book jackets, and other supplemental material that the vendor already provides to aid ordering.  It could also include electronic books ordered by the library.  eBook discovery is still a problem in many libraries, and this would be another avenue that these materials could be surfaced to the user. Even more exciting, a new materials list supplied by a monograph vendor might be able to include electronic or print books from a patron-driven acquisition plan.  These would be books that the library does not yet own, but will own if a user indicates interest.  It seems almost counterintuitive to the idea of a new materials list, since the materials have not yet been acquired, but it could provide one more way to present these potential acquisitions to the library patrons and possibly drive ad-ditional use. The downside to a new materials list coming from a monograph vendor is that it would not include the universe of new materials acquired by a library.  While many libraries use one main mono-graph vendor for a large percent-age of acquired titles, there are always other ma-terials coming in from other sources, whether secondary vendors, non-print sources, or gifts.  It might be possible to supply an ISBN load to the monograph vendor that would allow these additional new items to be included in the list.Another possibility is oCLC.  Many librar-ies set their holdings in WorldCat, so oCLC has a good idea of what we own.  They also have supplemental material about each book that they could feed to the library, such as book jacket images.  An advantage to oCLC is that their list could encompass most new materials acquired by a library, regardless of origin or format.  It could include purchased eBooks, though items available through a patron-driven plan would be more difficult to include.  If the new materials list was combined with World-Cat Local, a user could place a hold or check the available copies quickly from the list itself. One possible problem would be any delay be-tween the arrival of a new book in the library and the upload of holdings to oCLC. If we had an easy way to get the new materi-als list data, we would be able to think about the best ways to provide this information to our patrons, based on our environment.  Instead of just offering an RSS feed, we could provide a variety of output options for the new materials that would fit user workflows.  Another ex-ample would be making the new materials list compatible with library mobile sites, since this would be a natural addition to the basic mobile catalog offered by many libraries.  Finally, a user-friendly list could also be pushed outside the bounds of the library Website to appear on library social media sites or academic depart-ment sites for the school.The new materials list is an important tool for libraries to highlight their acquisitions and promote usage of these items.  This tool deserves more than to be created hastily and pushed to the lower levels of the library Web-site.  If a vendor can help us make this list easy, attractive, and flexible, we can spend our time working with our users instead.  

The Challenges of Bibliographic Control and Scholarly Integrity in an Online World of Multiple Versions of Journal Articles

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Purdue E-Pubs

Crossref