[open-bibliography] Ex Libris forms expert group on open data in Alma

[Anders Söderbäck]

I *guess* the reason ExLibris has formed this group is because the issue might be a bit vague and confusing to them as well. ExLibris highest priority is to be able to sell Alma, not to promote openness, which means that they will need to look at the issue from many different angles. Obviously they need to look at the possibilities for handling different licenses within the Alma Community zone. There will be lots of OCLC libraries in Alma, and not allowing WorldCat data in there would be a bad business strategy for ExLibris.

I don't think the Alma Community zone will revolutionize the bibliographic ecosystem. What is interesting about it is that it is an obvious competitor to WorldCat, and as such it might raise a lot of interesting questions regarding different practices around licensing etc.

ExLibris are not against open bibliographic data, but their main priority is to be able to sell their new system. Which is fine by me. It is we, libraries and others, that need to tell our vendors that open means open. Hopefully a vendor such as ExLibris (or anyone else) will use (true) openness to gain competitive advantage.

Open bibliographic data will lower the total global cost of cataloguing, but this also, however, implies lower profit margins for vendors.

/ Anders

Från: Peter Murray-Rust <pm286 at cam.ac.uk<mailto:pm286 at cam.ac.uk>>
Svara till: List for Working Group on Open Bibliographic Data <open-bibliography at lists.okfn.org<mailto:open-bibliography at lists.okfn.org>>
Datum: Wed, 22 Jun 2011 13:28:30 +0200
Till: List for Working Group on Open Bibliographic Data <open-bibliography at lists.okfn.org<mailto:open-bibliography at lists.okfn.org>>
Ämne: Re: [open-bibliography] Ex Libris forms expert group on open data in Alma



On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 11:39 AM, Adrian Pohl <adrian.pohl at okfn.org<mailto:adrian.pohl at okfn.org>> wrote:
Hello,

Ex Libris has formed an "Expert Advisory Group for Open Data in the
Alma Library Management Service", see http://bit.ly/jfPKDj

Karen, can you provide some more information about this? It doesn't
seem to be focused on legal openness. Also I find this document quite
inconsistent. A phrase like the Alma Community zone being "a catalog
of bibliographic records shared by all libraries that are using the
Alma library management service" does sound more like an exclusive
club than an open database to me. Alongside Karen's quote this is a
bit strange.

The word "Open" is often used in  ways that are inconsistent with the OKD. I remember a vendor presenting their "Open API" at a JISC meeting. I questioned them and it appeared that the "Open API" was:
* confidential information
* could not be disclosed by purchasers

The best synonym I came up with was "confidential documentation for our software"

"Open" may simply mean that there is a consortium involved.

This is why the OKD is so important. Without its simple precision we flounder in meaningless dialogue.

P.



--
Peter Murray-Rust
Reader in Molecular Informatics
Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
University of Cambridge
CB2 1EW, UK
+44-1223-763069
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-bibliography/attachments/20110622/47a69387/attachment-0001.html>