From blawlor at nfais.org Mon Jul 8 09:11:26 2013 From: blawlor at nfais.org (Bonnie Lawlor) Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2013 09:11:26 -0400 Subject: [nfais-l] NFAIS Webonar - Moving from Taxonomies to Ontologies Message-ID: <011601ce7bdc$a6fb6d40$f4f247c0$@org> NFAIS Webinar: Moving from Taxonomies to Ontologies - What, Why, When, and How Is your organization using the most effective tools to ensure the discoverability of its content? What are the differences between ontologies and taxonomies? Which is best suited to help you meet your content objectives in a web-based environment? To help you answer these questions, NFAIS has scheduled a 90-minutes webinar, Moving from Taxonomies to Ontologies: What, Why, When, and How, that will take place on July 17, 2013 from 11:00am - 12:30pm EDST. The speaker for this session will be Dan Segal, Senior Taxonomist, Marcinko Enterprises, Inc. (MEI). While both taxonomies and ontologies are designed to manage relationships among terms, ontologies offer support for managing the more complex relationships that are used in today's retrieval systems. This session will take a look at the structure of ontologies and how they are managed using ontology management software; the differences in the software currently available, including open source software for ontology management; and when and how to migrate from a taxonomy to an ontology. This is a stand-alone webinar, but if you missed the first 90-minute session on this topic, Taxonomies and Ontologies: Definitions, Differences, and Use, you can still register to view the archived recording at your leisure and receive a 10% discount off both registrations. The first session was led by Gale Hodge, Senior Information Scientist, Information International Associates, who has extensive experience in developing knowledge organization systems. Her presentation provided participants with an understanding of taxonomies and ontologies and the value that each offers. Attendees were extremely positive in their feedback: "Thanks so much for the interesting webinar. It was a very helpful introduction to all the confusing terms related to classification and ontologies." "This was exceptionally useful to me. Thank you!" "The seminar was very well-structured and the speaker talked very clear and not too fast. Very knowledgeable person!" If you or your staff want to learn more about the role that taxonomies and ontologies play in organizing content for maximum discovery, retrieval and use, register for one or both webinars today. The fee for a single webinar is as follows: Individuals: NFAIS members, $105; Sister Society members, $115, and non-members, $125. Groups (3 or more): NFAIS; $255; Sister Society, $275; and non-member, $295. Group registrations and are ideal for organization-wide professional development. All groups receive the link to the archived recording(s) for viewing at any time. Registrants for the series receive a 10% discount. The registration form can be accessed at: http://nfais.org/event?eventID=524 and can be used to register for the archived recording of the first webinar. For more information contact Jill O'Neill, NFAIS Director, Communication and Planning, 215-893-1561 (phone); 215-893-1564 (fax); mailto:jilloneill at nfais.org or go to http://www.nfais.org/. NFAIS: Serving the Global Information Community -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From blawlor at nfais.org Fri Jul 12 14:10:02 2013 From: blawlor at nfais.org (Bonnie Lawlor) Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2013 14:10:02 -0400 Subject: [nfais-l] Job Opening - National Library of Medicine Message-ID: <020601ce7f2b$0791a5b0$16b4f110$@org> Open Position Soon to be Announced the National Library of Medicine The week of July 15th or soon after, there will be an announcement on USAJOBS.gov for the Head of MEDLARS Management Section (MMS) position within the Bibliographic Services Division at the National Library of Medicine. The position will be listed as a Supervisory Technical Information Specialist (GS-1412-14), with a salary range from $105,211 to $136,771 including locality pay per annum. The announcement will be posted for five days. This brief posting period is because of the federal government's interest in accelerating the hiring process and should not be interpreted as an indication that someone has already been selected. The selected candidate will serve as the Head of the MEDLARS Management Section, a section of 23 staff members within the Bibliographic Services Division at the National Library of Medicine. The MEDLARS Management Section provides a range of services supporting several of the Library's leading bibliographic information and terminology resources. The Head of the MEDLARS Management Section assists the Division Chief in managing MMS, and is responsible for: overseeing budget and staffing requirements; analyzing programs and assessing resource requirements; coordinating activities related to data quality assurance, system testing, documentation, distance education, and customer service support; Formulating long- and short-range goals and plans for the section; advising the Division Chief on recommended policy issues; and representing NLM to various professional and government organizations. MMS is responsible for contributing to the National Library of Medicine's mission of providing biomedical research and health information worldwide through a variety of programs and activities, including: providing data quality assurance, system testing, documentation, distance education, and customer service for MEDLINE/PubMed (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed); providing data quality assurance, system testing, documentation, distance education, and customer service for NLM terminology resources such as the Unified Medical Language System (UMLS) (http://www.nlm.nih.gov/research/umls/index.html), RxNorm (http://www.nlm.nih.gov/research/umls/rxnorm/), and the Value Set Authority Center (VSAC) (https://vsac.nlm.nih.gov/); publishing the NLM Technical Bulletin (http://www.nlm.nih.gov/pubs/techbull/tb.html), NLM's communication resource to the libraries and information professionals concerning electronic information resources; and overseeing the data distribution and licensing programs for NLM bibliographic and terminology resources. In addition to an interesting, challenging work environment, NLM has a great location on the campus of the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland. It is a short Metro ride from Washington D.C. and a short walk from Bethesda's thriving restaurant and retail district. Please contact David Gillikin, Chief, Bibliographic Services Division at 301.496.6217 or gillikd at mail.nlm.nih.gov with questions. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From BLawlor at nfais.org Sat Jul 13 10:26:59 2013 From: BLawlor at nfais.org (Bonnie Lawlor) Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2013 10:26:59 -0400 Subject: [nfais-l] Registration closing for NFAIS webinar Message-ID: <000001ce7fd5$092081d0$1b618570$@nfais.org> REGISTRATION CLOSES ON JULY 16TH FOR THE NFAIS WEBINAR: MOVING FROM TAXONOMIES TO ONTOLOGIES - WHAT, WHY, WHEN AND HOW Is your organization using the most effective tools to ensure the discoverability of its content)? Do you understand the differences between ontologies and taxonomies and know which is best suited to help you meet your content objectives in a web-based environment? To help you answer these questions register before 3:00pm EDST on Tuesday, July 16th for the 90-minute NFAIS webinar, Moving from Taxonomies to Ontologies: What, Why, When, and How. The nsession will take place on Wednesday, July 17, 2013 from 11:00am - 12:30pm EDST. The speaker for this session will be Dan Segal, Senior Taxonomist, Marcinko Enterprises, Inc. (MEI), who will discuss the structure of ontologies and how they are managed using ontology management software; the differences in the software currently available, including open source software for ontology management; and when and how to migrate from a taxonomy to an ontology. Remember, while both taxonomies and ontologies are designed to manage relationships among terms, ontologies offer support for managing the more complex relationships that are used in today's web-based retrieval systems. This is a stand-alone webinar, but if you missed the first 90-minute session on this topic, Taxonomies and Ontologies: Definitions, Differences, and Use, you can still register to view the archived recording at your leisure and receive a 10% discount off both registrations. The first session was led by Gale Hodge, Senior Information Scientist, Information International Associates, who has extensive experience in developing knowledge organization systems. Her presentation provided participants with an understanding of taxonomies and ontologies and the value that each offers. Attendees were extremely positive in their feedback: "Thanks so much for the interesting webinar. It was a very helpful introduction to all the confusing terms related to classification and ontologies." "This was exceptionally useful to me. Thank you!" "The seminar was very well-structured and the speaker talked very clear and not too fast. Very knowledgeable person!" If you or your staff want to learn more about the role that taxonomies and ontologies play in organizing content for maximum discovery, retrieval and use, register for one or both webinars today. The fee for a single webinar is as follows: Individuals: NFAIS members, $105; Sister Society members, $115, and non-members, $125. Groups (3 or more): NFAIS; $255; Sister Society, $275; and non-member, $295. Group registrations and are ideal for organization-wide professional development. All groups receive the link to the archived recording(s) for viewing at any time. Registrants for the series receive a 10% discount. The registration form can be accessed at: http://nfais.org/event?eventID=524 and can be used to register for the archived recording of the first webinar. For more information contact Jill O'Neill, NFAIS Director, Communication and Planning, 215-893-1561 (phone); 215-893-1564 (fax); mailto:jilloneill at nfais.org or go to http://www.nfais.org/. NFAIS: Serving the Global Information Community -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From BLawlor at nfais.org Thu Jul 18 12:39:37 2013 From: BLawlor at nfais.org (Bonnie Lawlor) Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2013 12:39:37 -0400 Subject: [nfais-l] Open Position at National Library of Medicine Message-ID: <000001ce83d5$6478e3c0$2d6aab40$@nfais.org> NLM Position Now Open: Head of MEDLARS Management Section The Head of MEDLARS Management Section (MMS) position within the Bibliographic Services Division at the National Library of Medicine is now open on USAJOBS.com and will close on Tuesday, July 23, 2013. This brief posting period is because of the federal government's interest in accelerating the hiring process and should not be interpreted as an indication that someone has already been selected. Supervisory Technical Information Specialist (MP) https://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/347233700?share=email MP stands for merit promotion. Applicants for MP announcements must be qualified current or former federal employees. Supervisory Technical Information Specialist (DE) https://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/346569100?share=email DE stands for delegated examining. Typically, candidates who are entering Federal service for the first time from the private sector will need to apply for delegated examining positions. The position is for a Supervisory Technical Information Specialist (GS-1412-14), with a salary range from $105,211 to $136,771 including locality pay per annum The selected candidate will serve as the Head of the MEDLARS Management Section, a section of 23 staff members within the Bibliographic Services Division at the National Library of Medicine. The MEDLARS Management Section provides a range of services supporting several of the Library's leading bibliographic information and terminology resources. The Head of the MEDLARS Management Section assists the Division Chief in managing MMS, and is responsible for: overseeing budget and staffing requirements; analyzing programs and assessing resource requirements; coordinating activities related to data quality assurance, system testing, documentation, distance education, and customer service support; Formulating long- and short-range goals and plans for the section; advising the Division Chief on recommended policy issues; and representing NLM to various professional and government organizations. MMS is responsible for contributing to the National Library of Medicine's mission of providing biomedical research and health information worldwide through a variety of programs and activities, including: providing data quality assurance, system testing, documentation, distance education, and customer service for MEDLINE/PubMed ( http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed); providing data quality assurance, system testing, documentation, distance education, and customer service for NLM terminology resources such as the Unified Medical Language System (UMLS) ( http://www.nlm.nih.gov/research/umls/index.html), RxNorm ( http://www.nlm.nih.gov/research/umls/rxnorm/), and the Value Set Authority Center (VSAC) ( https://vsac.nlm.nih.gov/); publishing the NLM Technical Bulletin ( http://www.nlm.nih.gov/pubs/techbull/tb.html), NLM's communication resource to the libraries and information professionals concerning electronic information resources; and overseeing the data distribution and licensing programs for NLM bibliographic and terminology resources. In addition to an interesting, challenging work environment, NLM has a great location on the campus of the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland. It is a short Metro ride from Washington D.C. and a short walk from Bethesda's thriving restaurant and retail district. Please contact David Gillikin, Chief, Bibliographic Services Division at 301.496.6217 or gillikd at mail.nlm.nih.gov with questions. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jilloneill at nfais.org Wed Jul 24 14:42:41 2013 From: jilloneill at nfais.org (jilloneill at nfais.org) Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 14:42:41 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [nfais-l] NFAIS Enotes, 2013, Number 3, Public Data, Public Access, Public Discussion Message-ID: <1374691361.189515967@webmail.nfais.org> NFAIS Enotes, 2013 Number 3 Public Data, Public Access, Public Discussion Written and Compiled by Jill O?Neill At the end of February 2013, the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), part of the Executive Office of the President, issued a memorandum to the heads of executive departments and agencies pertaining to improving and increasing access to federally-funded scientific research, both in the forms of published articles as well as digital scientific data. Those agencies with more than $100 million in annual conduct of research and development expenditures were instructed to develop strategies and approaches for long term preservation as well as the means for searching, retrieving,g and analyzing documented results from the Federal research investment. In particular on page 4 of the memorandum, the OSTP suggests that ?Repositories could be maintained by the Federal agency funding the research, through an arrangement with other Federal agencies, or through other parties working in partnership with the agency including, but not limited, to scholarly and professional associations, publishers, and libraries.? The full text of the OSTP Memorandum (also known as the Holdren memo) may be found at: [http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/ostp_public_access_memo_2013.pdf] http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/ostp_public_access_memo_2013.pdf. David Crotty of the Oxford University Press voiced his first impression of the February 22 memo on the Scholarly Kitchen blog saying that (in his view) the memo was fair and even-handed, even an enhancement to the work of both Open Access advocates and the publishing community (See [http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2013/02/25/expanding-public-access-to-the-results-of-federally-funded-research-first-impressions-on-the-us-governments-policy/] http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2013/02/25/expanding-public-access-to-the-results-of-federally-funded-research-first-impressions-on-the-us-governments-policy/). Following up in May, there were two one-day events sponsored by the National Academy of Sciences to hear commentary from the various communities with regard to the OSTP memorandum, one day devoted to hearing concerns surrounding the impact of the policy on publications and the second day devoted to concerns surrounding scientific research data. Coverage by Information Today gives a sense of what some of the top concerns were -- publisher embargoes, infrastructure/interoperability, and cost considerations (see: [http://newsbreaks.infotoday.com/NewsBreaks/Dialogue-Over-Public-Access-to-Scholarly-Publications-Continues-in-the-US-89803.asp] http://newsbreaks.infotoday.com/NewsBreaks/Dialogue-Over-Public-Access-to-Scholarly-Publications-Continues-in-the-US-89803.asp). A more extensive, in-depth write-up of the events by science librarian and Ph.D. candidate, Shannon Bole, may be found at [http://www.scilogs.com/scientific_and_medical_libraries/what-is-e-science-and-how-should-it-be-managed/] http://www.scilogs.com/scientific_and_medical_libraries/what-is-e-science-and-how-should-it-be-managed/. In the wake of those public expressions of concern, various potential partners for Federal agencies (that is, associations, publishers, universities and libraries) brought forward their proposals for compliance with the OSTP memorandum. The first was CHORUS, proposed by the Association of American Publishers. Essentially, CHORUS (Clearing House for the Open Research of the United States) would aggregate the metadata associated with federally-funded research onto a searchable platform. The searcher would then be re-directed to the appropriate publisher platform where the version of record of the published research could then be accessed. Rather than suggesting that agencies build new repositories on the order of PubMed Central, compliance with the OSTP memorandum could be accomplished through a decentralized approach that is very nearly fully operational. The CHORUS approach is heavily dependent upon publisher participation in CrossRef ([http://www.crossref.org/] http://www.crossref.org) and involvement with several of their initiatives such as FundRef (development of metadata which ties agency funding to specific research projects) and Prospect (development of standardized APIs and data representation for purposes of facilitating text- and data-mining). For more detail on just how this is envisioned, see AAP statements at [http://www.publishers.org/press/107/] http://www.publishers.org/press/107/ with updates at: [http://www.publishers.org/press/110/] http://www.publishers.org/press/110/. A presentation to attendees of the United Kingdom Serials Group (UKSG) meeting in April by Frederic Dylla, Executive Director and CEO of the American Institute of Physics (AIP), provides a great deal of background information about the development of CHORUS and is well worth viewing (see: ([http://www.aip.org/aip/evolving_view.pdf] http://www.aip.org/aip/evolving_view.pdf). Also worth noting, however, with regard to the CHORUS approach (which has been presented as being largely in place) is that one of the aspects not yet ready to go has to do with text and data mining. The CHORUS proposal references CrossRef?s new text and data mining project, Prospect, but the proposed system is only in its pilot phase and neither broadly known nor tested. The Dylla presentation above as well as a presentation by Ed Pentz, Executive Director, CrossRef to the STM Association in May provide more background about the project (See [http://river-valley.tv/prospect-a-text-mining-initiative-from-crossref/] http://river-valley.tv/prospect-a-text-mining-initiative-from-crossref/). At least one agency, the Department of Energy through its Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI), has a tool that can operate in conjunction with CHORUS. This is the Public Access Gateway for Energy and Science (PAGES). It is a working prototype that does the type of redirecting of traffic to distributed collections in much the fashion that the CHORUS proposal advocates. A presentation given by Dr. Walter Warnick, the Director of OSTI, fills in the gaps of the program (see [http://www.cendi.gov/presentations/01_09_13_DOE.pdf] http://www.cendi.gov/presentations/01_09_13_DOE.pdf. The second proposal came from the Association of Research Libraries (ARL), the Association of American Universities (AAU) and the Association of Public and Land Grant Universities (APLU) with the acronym of SHARE (Shared Access Research Ecosystem). Building on the existence of institutional repositories at many research universities, this proposal offers the alternative to agencies of using those repositories for depositing and ensuring access to published research and data sets. This negates any need for a Federal agency to build its own repository (a bit of a non-starter as an option, since the memorandum had already specified that any plan or approach adopted by the agency would have to fit within existing budgeted resources). SHARE depends heavily on the adoption by agencies of a standardized set of metadata fields for purposes of successful ingestion and subsequent user discovery. An article in Library Journal does a good job of explaining the ins and outs (see: [http://lj.libraryjournal.com/2013/06/oa/arl-launches-library-led-solution-to-federal-open-access-requirements/] http://lj.libraryjournal.com/2013/06/oa/arl-launches-library-led-solution-to-federal-open-access-requirements/), but the primary document outlining SHARE may be found at: [http://www.arl.org/storage/documents/publications/share-proposal-07june13.pdf] http://www.arl.org/storage/documents/publications/share-proposal-07june13.pdf. The biggest challenges to implementation of the SHARE approach is the uneven status of existing academic repositories, the uncertainty of funding at the state level for the parent institutions housing these repositories, and the time lag needed to get the SHARE scheme up and running across the network of institutions. With regard to data- and text-mining, the SHARE proposal recognizes in much the same way that CHORUS does that this is a licensing issue. The SHARE solution notes that ?copyright licenses need to be granted on a non-exclusive basis? to both agencies and universities. As a follow-up note, the SHARE proposal says on page 9, ?academic research programs are rapidly developing strategies centered on the challenges of big data and correspondingly the development of data science or data analytics. The corpus of digital repository content, both full text articles as well as the associated data sets, will provide a rich resource for these research programs to experiment with, test and develop new methods to extract meaning and relationships from the repositories.? That Library Journal article mentioned was careful to note that CHORUS and SHARE are not mutually exclusive. Properly engineered in terms of interoperability, a hybrid of the two proposals might easily relieve the burden of compliance that Federal agencies face in meeting their obligation, sharing it across the various constituencies most likely to benefit from a collaborative agreement. The May 2013 meeting of the Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR) membership, largely European in make-up, featured a talk by Tony Hey of Microsoft Research that seemed to suggest that the SHARE proposal or something like it would be a logical open access approach. Hey stated that major university research libraries should develop a federated repository system, although he noted that there were challenges associated with federated search and the ?Invisible Web.? (Hey said that this was the only way that libraries might avoid the disintermediation that was already in progress due to the accomplishments of search giants Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft in enabling discovery of new research from the researcher?s desktop ? see: [http://www.coar-repositories.org/files/TonyHey-COAR-Talk.pdf] http://www.coar-repositories.org/files/TonyHey-COAR-Talk.pdf). But both the public and private sector are still faced with those three major pain points -- the potential time lag in providing public access to the final version of record (embargoes), the interoperability of the various systems as the user/searcher gets transferred across platforms in pursuit of relevant content, and the costs of ensuring long-term sustainability. Documentation of challenges in addition to those pain points have appeared in various forms over the course of the past twelve to eighteen months. For example, gaps in preparedness in archiving, preserving and curating data (insofar as both researcher and librarian are concerned) were noted in the CLIR publication, The Problem of Data, in August of 2012 (See: [http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub154/pub154.pdf] http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub154/pub154.pdf). The report notes that the lack of expert training for information professionals in this specific arena is a very serious concern. The fear that publishers have of the potential impact of government repositories of published material ? such as PubMed Central -- has been captured in research done by Phil Davis, independent consultant and contributor to the SSP Scholarly Kitchen blog. Davis documented a loss in traffic to publishers? sites as searchers were diverted to full text available in the PubMed Central repository (See [http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2013/04/04/pubmed-central-reduces-publisher-traffic-study-shows/] http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2013/04/04/pubmed-central-reduces-publisher-traffic-study-shows/). As Davis notes there, ?While PMC may be providing complementary access to readers traditionally underserved by scientific journals, the loss of article readership from the journal website may weaken the ability of the journal to build communities of interest around research papers, impede the communication of news and events to scientific society members and journal readers, and reduce the perceived value of the journal to institutional subscribers.? Elsewhere Davis also challenged the findings of a UK study of institutional repositories that was used as evidence that repositories posed no challenge to the profitability of commercial publishers (see: [http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2013/04/24/peer-repository-study-recast/] http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2013/04/24/peer-repository-study-recast/). Hence the interest in ensuring that embargoes are in place to protect the publisher?s investment before deposit to a repository becomes widely accessible. The White House directive mentions a twelve month post-publication embargo period, but as a guideline on the grounds that the needs across disciplines for such access may vary. Those with an interest can use the query ?article embargo institutional repositories? in their favorite Web search tool to see the variety of publisher stance on such time frames as well as the instructional materials provided by research libraries regarding content embargoes. While the White House memo has sparked this conversation, it?s certainly not just a U.S. problem. Globally, the various stakeholders in the information community have been thinking about how implementation of repositories might work. Both best practices as well as the challenges of establishing and populating institutional repositories for use across a globally-networked environment have been documented by the previously mentioned COAR organization. COAR released its report on the current state of open access repository interoperability in October of 2012, and followed up in late June 2013 with a report on sustainable practices for populating such repositories. A third report from COAR as to the future directions of institutional repositories is due to appear later this year. For more information, consult the following Web pages: 1. [http://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/repository-interoperability/coar-interoperability-project/the-current-state-of-open-access-repository-interoperability-2012/] http://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/repository-interoperability/coar-interoperability-project/the-current-state-of-open-access-repository-interoperability-2012/ 2. [http://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/repository-content/sustainable-practices-for-populating-repositories-report/] http://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/repository-content/sustainable-practices-for-populating-repositories-report/ 3. [http://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/repository-interoperability/coar-interoperability-project/coar-interoperability-roadmap/] http://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/repository-interoperability/coar-interoperability-project/coar-interoperability-roadmap/ But even with those issues, the continuing emergence of international data repositories such as Zenodo ([http://www.zenodo.org/] http://www.zenodo.org) stands as testament to the idea that sustainable repositories are the solution of choice. The final question mark in this discussion is in the cost-management issue. In an April 2012 report, Lasting Impact: Sustainability of Disciplinary Repositories, Ricky Erway, Senior Program Officer, OCLC Research, offered a list of funding options for academic libraries looking into the idea of building a repository. Her list (see page 16) included the following: ? institutional support ? use based institutional contributions ? support via consortium dues ? distributed network of volunteers ? federal government funding ? decentralized arrangement ? commercial ?freemium? service (basic access is free; value-added services for fee) Lasting Impact: Sustainability of Disciplinary Repositories may be downloaded from: [http://www.oclc.org/content/dam/research/publications/library/2012/2012-03.pdf] http://www.oclc.org/content/dam/research/publications/library/2012/2012-03.pdf A case study that appeared in the ASIS&T Bulletin (October/November 2012) gives some of the actual dollar amounts required by Cornell University in sustaining arXive as a repository. NFAIS members may recall that Cornell University introduced a modified consortium/membership model for support of arXive in 2010, but have since also worked to attract additional matching funds to ensure its continued health. For the case study, see [http://www.asis.org/Bulletin/Oct-12/OctNov12_Rieger.html] http://www.asis.org/Bulletin/Oct-12/OctNov12_Rieger.html, but for the most recent update on gifts and matching funds ( See: [http://news.cornell.edu/stories/2012/08/arxiv-now-worldwide-consortium] http://news.cornell.edu/stories/2012/08/arxiv-now-worldwide-consortium). Because the interests of NFAIS members are primarily oriented towards support for professional researchers and scholars, one might think that the February memorandum would be of the greatest interest to this community. But there is a second wave that is also buffeting this membership. The White House itself called it a Big Day for Open Data ([http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2013/05/10/recap-big-day-open-data] http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2013/05/10/recap-big-day-open-data). The second executive order and memo was issued by the White House Office of Management and Budget in May of this year. Entitled Open Data Policy ? Managing Information as an Asset, the so-called Burwell memo required agencies to: (1) Collect or create information in a way that supports downstream information processing and dissemination activities (2) Build information systems to support interoperability and information accessibility (3) Strengthen data management and release practices (4) Strengthen measures to ensure that privacy and confidentiality are fully protected and that data are properly secured (5) Incorporate new interoperability and openness requirements into core agency processes ([http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/memoranda/2013/m-13-13.pdf%20] http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/memoranda/2013/m-13-13.pdf) Slate Magazine said ?It sends a clear statement from the top that open and machine-readable should be the default for government information?With this executive order, the President and his advisors have focused on using open data for entrepreneurship, innovation, and scientific discovery.? ([http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2013/05/open_data_executive_order_is_the_best_thing_obama_s_done_this_month.html] http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2013/05/open_data_executive_order_is_the_best_thing_obama_s_done_this_month.html). Forrester analyst, Jennifer Belissent, Ph.D., also heralded the significance of this memorandum and noted the clear emphasis on engaging application developers rather than the average citizen(see: [http://blogs.forrester.com/jennifer_belissent_phd/13-05-16-open_data_is_an_asset_new_us_federal_guidance_for_reaching_its_full_potential] http://blogs.forrester.com/jennifer_belissent_phd/13-05-16-open_data_is_an_asset_new_us_federal_guidance_for_reaching_its_full_potential). That emphasis on building for the economic purposes of fueling data-driven innovation raises another issue. The analyst notes that this represents a marketing challenge for federal agencies; it becomes a question of ?How do potential audiences find the data and how do agencies get the word out? A first step is through data inventories. The Memo stipulates that agencies create or update their data inventories. The goal is again to include all data ? public, potentially public and not to be made public data ? over time. A public listing ? of just those data sets already published or potentially publishable ? would be made available on Data.gov. But this remains an if-we-build-it-they-will-come marketing strategy. Promotion requires a strategy for outreach to potential audiences. Agencies, rev your marketing engines!? (The OMB has required agencies to have a full inventory of their available data-sets by early December.) The agenda behind this interest in open data is twofold ? one is to make more evident the dollar value of government investment in various research initiatives and the other to make more evident the actual return on investment in order to effectively direct additional spending. A number of emerging entities, such as New York University?s Governance Lab ([http://www.thegovlab.org/] http://www.thegovlab.org) and the Research Data Alliance ([https://rd-alliance.org/] https://rd-alliance.org) housed at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, are indicative of the momentum behind this challenge. In the context of these two memorandums, agencies are faced with a complex and unfunded mandate to open up access to vast amounts of data, some of which is data captured through government activity ? thus falling into the public domain --and some of which is gathered through federally-funded research projects. What will work most successfully for the highly diverse government agencies affected is not likely to be a simple, one-size-fits-all approach. The various plans submitted to the OSTP for approval will have to recognize the strengths of both the CHORUS and the SHARE approach but factor those strengths into unique solutions that best serve the diverse research communities that are each agency?s particular care and constituency. ************************************* 2013 NFAIS Supporters Access Innovations, Inc. Accessible Archives, Inc. American Psychological Association/PsycINFO American Theological Library Association Annual Reviews CAS CrossRef Data Conversion Laboratory, Inc. Defense Technical Information Center Getty Research Institute The H. W. Wilson Foundation Information Today, Inc. IFIS Modern Language Association OCLC Philosopher?s Information Center ProQuest RSuite CMS Scope e-Knowledge Center TEMIS, Inc. Thomson Reuters IP & Science Thomson Reuters IP Solutions Unlimited Priorities LLC ******************************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jilloneill at nfais.org Thu Jul 25 14:33:29 2013 From: jilloneill at nfais.org (jilloneill at nfais.org) Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2013 14:33:29 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [nfais-l] Job Listing - National Agricultural Library - Tech Info Specialist Message-ID: <1374777209.788924108@webmail.nfais.org> Information about the National Agricultural Library as well as information as to how to apply appears at the various links listed below: The [http://nal.usda.gov/] National Agricultural Library has a job opening for a Technical Information Specialist. Open at USA jobs from July 25, 2013 to August 5, 2013. This position is responsible for providing support in the maintenance and delivery of the [http://agclass.nal.usda.gov/] NAL Thesaurus and Glossary. Link to USA jobs?. Who may apply: United States Citizens [https://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/347536000] https://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/347536000 Jill O'Neill Director, Planning & Communication NFAIS Email: jilloneill at nfais.org Voice: 215/893-1561 Web: [http://www.nfais.org] http://www.nfais.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From BLawlor at nfais.org Wed Jul 31 07:37:21 2013 From: BLawlor at nfais.org (Bonnie Lawlor) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 07:37:21 -0400 Subject: [nfais-l] NFAIS - A New Season Begins Message-ID: <007201ce8de2$52320c20$f6962460$@nfais.org> RECRUITMENT OF NEW NFAIS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO BEGIN SHORTLY To everything there is a season. The transition from one to the next is marked by happy memories of what has past and anticipation of what is to come. It is with these emotions that I announce the resignation of NFAIS Executive Director, Bonnie Lawlor, who has led the Federation since November 2002. While it is difficult to imagine NFAIS without Bonnie at the helm, both Bonnie and the Board believe it is a good time for someone new to lead the organization forward in this next era of information discovery. Bonnie has been actively involved with NFAIS for a long time, becoming the Assembly Representative from the first NFAIS corporate member in 1987. She served on the Board and in the Presidential succession from 1988 -1991. She then chaired the information policy committee, authoring several white papers on database protection and working with three Executive Directors on policy issues until she herself assumed that role. Bonnie will remain as Executive Director until her successor is hired and has graciously volunteered to be a resource as needed during the transition period. Bonnie plans to remain active in the industry and in NFAIS for the foreseeable future. The Board will begin the recruitment process in August with the goal of introducing Bonnie's successor at the 2014 NFAIS Annual Meeting. Details on the recruitment process will follow and the job description will be posted on the NFAIS web site. An announcement will be sent to the NFAIS Listserv as soon as the information is posted. Please join me in thanking Bonnie for her many contributions to NFAIS, her excellent leadership, and wish her well in her next venture. A new season begins for NFAIS. July 31, 2013 L. Suzanne BeDell President, NFAIS Board of Directors -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jilloneill at nfais.org Wed Jul 31 15:58:08 2013 From: jilloneill at nfais.org (jilloneill at nfais.org) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 15:58:08 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [nfais-l] Howard Ratner Joins CHORUS initiative Message-ID: <1375300688.2335385@webmail.nfais.org> Howard Ratner, formerly with Nature, has moved to work on the CHORUS initiative. From the press announcement: Howard Ratner, well-known in the scholarly publishing community for his leadership work in technical services and standards, serves as Director of Development for CHORUS in its start-up phase. Ratner is currently leading the proof of concept ? a conceptual design framework ? and pilot stages across all stakeholders. CHORUS will offer a full suite of services for researchers, federal agencies, institutions, publishers and the public ensuring continued innovation in the delivery of scholarly communication. Most recently CTO and Executive Vice President, Nature Publishing Group, he was instrumental in the founding of such not-for-profit joint ventures as the Digital Object Identifier; CrossRef, the collaborative reference linking service between the world?s scholarly publishing platforms; and CLOCKSS, the sustainable archive of web-based scholarly articles established by academic publishers and research libraries. Additionally, he co-founded and served as chair of ORCID, the open, community-based initiative providing a registry of researcher identifiers and a means to link research activities and outputs to these identifiers. More at: [http://publishers.org/chorusleadership/] http://publishers.org/chorusleadership/ Jill O'Neill Director, Planning & Communication NFAIS Email: jilloneill at nfais.org Voice: 215/893-1561 Web: [http://www.nfais.org] http://www.nfais.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: