1 / 43

OLE Project

OLE Project. Open Library Environment: Working toward a next generation library automation framework. Marshall Breeding Director for Innovative Technology and Research Vanderbilt University Library Nashville, TN USA. Key Objectives. Next generation library automation

durin
Download Presentation

OLE Project

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. OLE Project Open Library Environment: Working toward a next generation library automation framework Marshall Breeding Director for Innovative Technology and Research Vanderbilt University Library Nashville, TN USA

  2. Key Objectives • Next generation library automation • Provide technology support suited for current library workflows • Community based • Owned and governed by the institutions it serves • Services oriented • Flexible technology approach • Business Process Modeling • Rethink library workflows outside of patterns set by legacy software

  3. Why OLE? Our current library business technologies cost too much and deliver too little. We need to rethink our services and workflows, and to use technology that enable innovation rather than locking us into the status quo.

  4. The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation • RIT Program in Research in Research Technology • Kuali, Sakai, OpenCollections, Fluid • Supports many projects that provide technology infrastructure for higher education • Supporting OLE Project by funding $475,700 grant proposal • http://rit.mellon.org • Program officer: Chris Mackie

  5. Duke University • Lead institution for OLE Project planning phase • Lynne O’Brien serves as principal investigator • Project support provided through Duke

  6. Other participating institutions • University of Kansas • Lehigh University • University of Pennsylvania • National Library of Australia • Library and Archives Canada • Vanderbilt University • Orbis Cascade Alliance • Rutgers University • University of Florida • University of Chicago • Columbia University • University of Maryland

  7. OLE Team @ Duke

  8. OLE Team @ University of Kansas

  9. OLE Project: Phase I • Planning and Design Phase • Develop Vision + Blueprint • Work with consultants with expertise in SOA and BPM • Instill community ownership of OLE • Recruit partners for Phase II

  10. OLE Project:Phase II • Build project to begin in 2009 • ~ 5.2 million project split between build partners and Mellon • Community source reference implementation • Create software based on OLE blueprint from current project • Build partners will have a high level of investment in OLE and will commit to implementation • Recruitment of build partners underway. Will develop proposal to Mellon.

  11. External consultants • SOA Systems, Inc. • Founded by Thomas Erl • http://www.soasystems.com/ • Web Age Solutions • http://www.webagesolutions.com/ • Kyle Gabhart

  12. OLE Phase I Project Activities • Kick-off Meeting at Duke • Nov 6-7 2008 • Project scope, SOA training • Regular online meetings • Meeting at Rutgers University • Training in business process modeling • More SOA • Regional workshops • Business Process Modeling for library workflows • Jan meeting at Lehigh • Jan 20 - 22 • March meeting at University of Kansas • March 16 – 20 • Meeting at Duke • May 28 - 29 • Final report submitted July 26

  13. Regional Workshops • Conduct business process modeling (BPM) exercises • Define library workflows which must be supported in OLE • Small group work to develop descriptions of library workflows • Workshop output will shape project design

  14. OLE Principles • Flexibility • Community Ownership • Service Oriented Architecture • Enterprise level integration • Efficiency • Sustainability

  15. Preparing for next generation library automation • Reassess workflows • Separate streams for print and digital? • Integrated processing of print and digital? • Opportunities to take advantage of SOA-based composite business applications • Assemble a more ideal set of tools for managing serials and periodicals

  16. Project Assumptions • OLE will provide services that will help academic and research institutions accomplish their core missions by improving the library’s ability to deliver its content and services throughout the institution’s activities. • OLE provides a transformative opportunity to the institution through its support for a more collaborative approach to research, teaching, and learning. • OLE will enable libraries to be more of a component within the enterprise infrastructure, raising the relevance of libraries to the organization’s mission. • Libraries are core to the research institution. • Adopting a model of community-source software development and a technology infrastructure based on service orientation is, in itself, a strategic innovation for libraries and universities.

  17. Project Assumptions (continued) • Business workflows at peer libraries are more similar than they are different • Libraries need to be able to leverage a dynamic information environment to support the research and educational mission of their institution • Digital formats will dominate our business processes • Collaborative and consortial activity is increasingly as important to libraries as work in local institutions. • Library business processes will increasingly involve interactions with external service providers and consumers

  18. Understanding library workflows • Libraries have changed from managing primarily print to primarily digital collections • Workflows largely defined by legacy software systems • Need to review library workflows through business process modeling to understand how work would be accomplished within a format-neutral framework

  19. Business Process Modeling

  20. Why OLE now? • Current ILS products are inadequate • Growing need for library systems to interact with other enterprise systems • Vendor consolidation constrains choice • Libraries need to control their own destinies

  21. Community source software • Open source license • Initial development within a closed community • All the advantages and risks of open source software • Costs and risks moderated through a defined group of invested institutions

  22. Proprietary Software • Closed source – program code considered trade secret and managed with a company or organization • Use of software controlled through licenses sold for up-front and ongoing payments • Software usually tied to a single vendor. • Business transitions often lead to the demise of library automation products

  23. Community Source and OLE • Have sustainability over the course of project development • Invest in the community of practice for long-term support and development • Fosters innovation and shared knowledge • Coordinates institutional goals rather than individual goals of the community of practice • Mitigates risk among peer institutions rather than a single entity or vendor

  24. Mellon will fund the creation of an community source reference implementation of the OLE design Governance involves: Ownership of intellectual property Project strategy Administrative support Legal support Open source software requires Governance

  25. Governance will be Library Driven Vendors will be involved in contract programming, support, hosting, etc Existing organization for non-profit status, legal support, user community The OLE Project will join the Kuali Foundation Take advantage of existing SOA components created for other Kuali components Governance strategy

  26. Governance • OLE Project • Governance through Kuali Foundation • “Kuali Library”

  27. Kuali Foundation • Kuali Financial • Business management system • Kuali Student • Student management system • Kuali Coeus • Research administration system • Kuali Rice • Middleware for SOA service bus integration

  28. OLE Project Technology Strategy

  29. ILS: a legacy concept? • ILS = Integrated Library System (Cataloging + Circulation + OPAC + Serials + Acquisitions) • Focused on print and physical inventory • Electronic content at the Journal Title or collection level • Emerged in the 1960’s – 1970’s • Functionality has evolved and expanded, but basic concepts and modules remain intact • Note: Some companies work toward evolving the ILS to competently handle both print and digital content (e.g. Innovative Interfaces)

  30. ILS: ever diminishing role • Many libraries putting much less emphasis on ILS • Just an inventory system for physical materials • Investments in electronic content increasing • Management of e-content handled outside of the ILS • Yet: libraries need comprehensive business automation more than ever. Mandate for more efficient operations. Do more with less.

  31. Dis-integration of Library Automation Functionality • ILS -- Print and Physical inventory • OpenURL Link resolver • Federated Search • Electronic Resource Management Module • Discovery layer interface

  32. Is non-integrated automation sustainable? • Major burden on library personnel • Serial procurement / installation / configuration / maintenance cycles take many years to result in a comprehensive environment • Inefficient data models • Disjointed interfaces for library users • Very long cycle to gain comprehensive automation

  33. Breaking down the modules • Traditional ILS • Cataloging • Circulation • Online Catalog • Acquisitions • Serials control • Reporting • Modern approach: SOA

  34. OLE Scope • More than an ILS; less than an ILS • New automation framework, managing resources agnostic to format • Support needed traditional functionality • Do not replicate other institutional components • Financial and business systems • Authentication • Integrate with existing institutional systems • Integrate with existing discovery systems • OLE will not build its own discovery interface but will make use of existing products such as eXtensible Catalog, VuFind, etc.

  35. Enterprise Level Interactions • Library business systems need to be better integrated and interoperable with campus business and learning systems. • Libraries must interact with and leverage other key campus systems, including financial, HR, student information, identity management, course management, and content repository systems

  36. What Is SOA • SOA = Service Oriented Architecture • Design approach • Independent software pieces • Pieces can be interchanged or repurposed more easily • Pieces can be combined to create new services or systems • Business experts and IT experts work together • SOA Process • Create high-level map of how the business should work • Deconstruct workflows • Define reusable services • Recombine services into a system that meets our requirements

  37. Service Oriented Architecture http://www.sun.com/products/soa/benefits.jsp

  38. Legacy ILS + e-content modules End User Interfaces: Federated Search OpenURL Linking Electronic Resource Mgmt System Circulation Acquisitions Functional modules: Cataloging Serials Data Stores: Staff Interfaces:

  39. SOA model for business automation • Underlying data repositories • Local or Global • Reusable business services • Composite business applications

  40. OLE Reference Model

  41. Research Academic National Other library types may not have enterprise infrastructure in place Yet, the OLE design should be applicable to a wide range of library settings Those without institutional authentication, financial, and other enterprise components may develop lightweight plug-ins within OLE. OLE Target Libraries

  42. Final Report complete Scope, reference model, inventory of processes and workflows While initial conceptual framework has been drafted, details will be fleshed out by the build team. Recruit partners for Build Phase Write Build Proposal Early versions in 18 months Status and Next Steps

  43. Questions and Discussion

More Related