Birrell, Duncan and Dunsire, Gordon and Menzies, Kathleen OCRIS: Online Catalogue and Repository Interoperability Study: Final Report., 2009 [Report]
Download (784kB) | Preview
The aims and objectives of OCRIS were to: • Survey the extent to which repository content is in scope for institutional library OPACs, and the extent to which it is already recorded there; • Examine the interoperability of OPAC and repository software for the exchange of metadata and other information; • List the various services to institutional managers, researchers, teachers and learners offered respectively by OPACs and repositories; • Identify the potential for improvements in the links (e.g. using link resolver technology) from repositories and/or OPACs to other institutional services, such as finance or research administration; • Make recommendations for the development of possible further links between library OPACs and institutional repositories, identifying the benefits to relevant stakeholder groups. Key Findings Interoperability and services 1. Interoperability between IRs and LMSs in UK HEIs is currently rare - only 2 percent of questionnaire respondents state that their systems definitely interoperate, with a further 14 percent stating that interoperability is pending. 2. Interoperability of either of these system types with some type of other institutional system is moderately high, and is slightly higher for LMSs than IRs. 3. Interoperability between LMSs or IRs and a range of other institutional systems is limited. It cannot be said that interoperability is substantial or that a wide variety of administrative systems interoperate with any individual library system. 4. The REF has clearly been a factor in the establishment or consideration of interoperability between Institutional Repositories and other administrative systems. 5. Services stemming from library systems are limited and narrow, excepting the generation of usage statistics and metadata enhancement services. 6. The generation of reports for specific administrative departments is not a common service offered by either IRs or LMSs. 7. The most popular service offered by IRs remains "advice on Open Access" suggesting perhaps that they are still in their infancy, still require explanation thus have yet to spread their wings in terms of widening their range of services. 8. The use of metasearch/linking tools as well as web services and APIs is moderately popular within LMSs and IRs; the data gathered is not sufficient to discern why or what these tools and services are being used for.
|Keywords:||catalogues, library management systems, metadata;, OPACs, repositories|
|Subjects:||H. Information sources, supports, channels. > HS. Repositories.
H. Information sources, supports, channels. > HM. OPACs.
|Depositing user:||Elinor Toland|
|Date deposited:||15 Jan 2010|
|Last modified:||02 Oct 2014 12:14|
Actions (login required)