Disintegrating the Library Management System: Robert McDonald, Gary Charbonneau, Mary Popp Librarians Day -- May 15, 2009 Paths Forward from Vendor Products.

Disintegrating the Library Management System:

Robert McDonald, Gary Charbonneau, Mary Popp

Librarians Day -- May 15, 2009

Paths Forward from Vendor Products

to Open Source

Our Plan for Today

• Provide context for Integrated Library Systems (ILS).

• Introduce the ILS open source “option” • Show examples of vendor products• Show examples of open source products• Introduce OLE, a new concept for open

source ILS systems.

Examining Our Roots

• The origins of the ILS, or “why are we in this mess”?

• It all started with MARC• Cataloging – the first module• Circulation – the second• Public interface was developed late• Acquisitions and Serials – lagging behind

Dis-Integration?

• Integrated system pulls together a variety of separate functions or modules.

• Now we are reversing that trend.• Dis-integration is the separation of these

functional modules.• Most often separation of back room tasks

from user interface.

Rice University Library - Sirsi

Rice University Library - AquaBrowser

Vanderbilt University - Sirsi

Vanderbilt University - Primo

IUPUC - Sirsi

IUPUC – WorldCat Local

University of Florida - Aleph

University of Florida - Endeca

Matrix of ILS Development

Open Source

OLE (back room only) Evergreen, Koha

VuFind, LibraryFind, etc.

Discovery

Aquabrowser

Vendor Front End

Endeca, Encore, PrimoSIRSIDynix Enterprise

Vendor Back End

Standard ILS systems

Current Library Systems• In addition to the core ILS layer libraries operate

separate systems to handle the following:

Electronic Resources Management System

OpenURL Linking Systems

Proxy or VPN Systems/Identity Mgmt Systems

Advanced Discovery Systems

Digital Library Content Systems

Digital Preservation Systems

Learning Management System Admin or Integration

Legacy ILS Functionality

Circulation Acquisitions

Cataloging Serials

Staff Interfaces:

Public User Interface:

Data Stores:

Functionalmodules:

Vendor Based ePurchasing

Vendor Based Metadata Enhancement

Legacy ILS

Legacy ILS Functionality

+eContentModule

+Advanced DiscoveryInterface

FederatedSearch/

AdvancedDiscovery

FederatedSearch/

AdvancedDiscovery

OpenURLLinking

OpenURLLinking

Electronic Resource

Mgmt.System

Electronic Resource

Mgmt.System

Unified Workflow Interface for Staff

Learning Mgmt./Campus Portal FeedsProxy/VPN for eContent Access

Legacy ILS +

Good Search Now

Raw MARC data

exports and reformats MARC from ILS

Flat text files

Parse text files

Indices

Web 2.0

Engine

User Interface

HTTP

HTTP

NextGen Search System/Faceted Search

Open Source/Community Source

• Library software can be created as either Open Source or Community Source.

• The difference is in the way the user community is defined.

• Can be limited in function or full-featured.• Allow for local specifications and user

needs.

Open Source Projects

http://blogs.the451group.com/opensource

Open Source Software

• Allows simultaneous development by different groups to meet different needs.

• Software source code is freely available.• Users can use, change or redistribute it

with no restrictions.• Implies collaboration among users.

Community Source Software

• A variation of Open Source software• Led by a community in which some

organizations commit resources.• Software is available through an Open

Source license but copyright is held by the group.

• Sakai and Kuali (both used at IU) are examples.

• Originally a project for the Georgia PINES consortium.

• Subsequently adopted by consortia in British Columbia, Michigan, and Indiana (“Evergreen Indiana”), plus a few individual libraries.

• Web site: http://open-ils.org/• Live catalog (Georgia Library PINES):

http://gapines.org/opac/en-US/skin/default/xml/index.xml

Evergreen

Univ. of Prince Edward Is. - Evergreen

Koha

• “The first open source ILS.”• Originated in New Zealand.• Used by smaller libraries.• Web site: http://www.koha.org/about-koha/• Live catalog (Antioch University, Santa

Barbara, CA): http://opac.antiochsb.edu/

Blacklight

• From University of Virginia.• Design goals:

• Relevance ranking.• Faceted browsing.• Ability to include “siloed” materials.• Customizable interfaces for different user groups.• “Re-mixable data.”

• Web site: http://blacklightopac.org/• Live catalog: http://blacklight.betech.virginia.edu/

VuFind

• Developed at Villanova U. but implemented first by National Library of Australia and Minnesota State Colleges and Universities.

• Design goals included:• Faceted browsing.• Inclusion of external content.• Social networking and personal recommendations.• Indexing of local resources.

• Web site: http://www.vufind.org/• Live catalog: http://library.villanova.edu/Find

Georgia Tech University - Voyager

Georgia Tech University - VuFind

eXtensible Catalog

• Project hosted at University of Rochester and funded by Mellon Foundation.

• Design goals include:

Easy access to physical and digital collections across multiple databases, metadata schemas, and standards.

Ability to reveal library content to content & learning management systems and web search engines.

• Web site: http://www.extensiblecatalog.org/• Live catalog: None yet. Open source software slated for

release end of Mar. 2009.

LibraryFind

• From Oregon State University.• Design goals:

• Universal platform for research. Open source metasearch software with OpenURL, includes the library catalog

• Two clicks—one to “find” and one to “get”• Fast, extensible and understandable• Customizable interfaces.

• Web site: http://libraryfind.org/home • Live catalog:

http://search.library.oregonstate.edu/record/search

In five years, if it isn’t digital, it will be invisible.

1. TRUE 2. FALSE 3. CAN’T DECIDE

or go to http://m.textthemob.com/id801

To vote, text to 41411"RETURN ID801 option"Ex. “RETURN ID801 1”

QUESTION 1

Question 4

• http://www.textthemob.com/print/801

Open Library Environment Project

• The OLE Project Framework will be used to build a scaleable, interoperable, library management system, that fits within the modern academic & research enterprise infrastructure & enables resource re-use, re-allocation, & sustainability for the future.

34

OLE Project and Mellon Foundation• Initial assessment of interest in libraries – early

2008.• Proposal development by a diverse group of

academic and national libraries – April 2008• The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation provided

funding for the design project – June 2008• Project underway August 2008 – July 2009• Key Deliverable – OLE Design Document – July

2009

Current OLE ParticipationPlanning group:

Columbia UniversityDuke UniversityLehigh UniversityIndiana UniversityLibrary and Archives CanadaNational Library of AustraliaOhioLinkOrbis Cascade AllianceRutgers UniversityUniversity of ChicagoUniversity of FloridaUniversity of KansasUniversity of MarylandUniversity of PennsylvaniaVanderbilt University

100+ libraries have sent representatives to business process modeling workshops

http://oleproject.org/workshops/

150+ participants in webcasts

100+ libraries have one or more individuals subscribed to OLE website

Regional meetings with library directors, CIOs, CFOs

What is SOA?

36

Service Oriented ArchitectureService Oriented Architecture

ServiceServiceSystem capabilities that provide access to functions and data are appropriately exposed to other components (applications, devices, networks, etc.)

OrientedOrientedUses “open” interoperability protocols

ArchitectureArchitectureIn its purest form, it’s the connection of systems (simple or complex)

SOA Video

Leveraging Enterprise Systems & Content• Better interoperability and integration with:

• Campus identity management systems• Leveraging both on-campus and externally (consortiums)

• Better ability to work with trusted peers (ex. Shibboleth)

• Campus HR and Student systems• Why copy faculty and student information into the ILS?

• Campus financial & purchasing systems• Take advantage of existing vendor information, invoice

management, bill paying, etc.

• Will require hard discussions of policies and workflow, but pay-off is potentially more secure data (fewer copies) and more efficient processes

OLE Reference Model

39

OLE Build Project

• Currently in progress• Build Proposal to Mellon September 2009• Looking for Build Partners• Utilizing existing infrastructure

• Kuali Rice Middleware• Existing Discovery Interfaces

• 2 year timeline

Steele Video

Questions?

Thanks to the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation for

OLE Funding!

Follow O

LE at

ww

w.tw

itter.com/oleproject

Questions?

• Robert McDonald – [email protected]: twitter@mcdonald

• Gary Charbonneau – [email protected]

• Mary Popp – [email protected]