Notes by Linda Plunket.
Jack, Vika, Jim Skypeck, Linda Carr, Tom, Dan Piekarski, and I met for the webinar. I thought it was good-- particularly the distinction between SUSHI and Counter, and the state of development of each. We had trouble with the sound, but when we called back in, it improved.
A librarian from Cornell talked about their involvement in the development of SUSHI. Cornell decided to invest staff time in the overall development of this protocol for libraries in general rather than implementing a system for their library in particular. I thought it was an interesting decision. COUNTER is a NISO standard for counting use of e-resources. SUSHI is a web services model for requesting data. So, for instance, by using SUSHI you (or Scholarly Stats) can request a COUNTER-compliant report (or any XML report) from a vendor. Some recent features of the latest release of COUNTER include:
- being able to handle consortial reports
- sets expectations for the handling of federated search engines
- SUSHI protocol must be included
This librarian mentioned that there's a significant cost for vendors in getting up to speed so that they can provide COUNTER-compliant reports.
Hana Levay, a librarian from U. of Washington Libraries, gave a presentation about their implementation of Scholarly Stats, ERM, and SUSHI. They are deriving cost-per-article-downloaded pretty easily for 24 vendor packages (e.g., JSTOR, Science Direct, EBSCO, etc.) and 34K journal titles. They showed their ERM screens and what sort of info they had to fill in for each vendor record. I had the sense that a lot of time was spent populating ERM before this data could be generated.
During the Q&A portion of the webinar, we turned off the sound and got into our own discussion of what this all means to us and if ERM was needed or if a XML database would suffice.