Some experiences learned aggregating TOC RSS feeds from publishers

ssantiago — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 10:47:45 +0000

- We have dealt at the “publisher level”. That means that we have created a “harvester” (a “connector” in federated-searching jargon) per each publisher because each of them normally use a particular software to generate its TOC RSS feeds (all the journals of a publisher have the some kind of TOC RSSs)

- Journals Acquisitions is a pain. That means we needed to replace the “harvester” for the affected journals. We needed to replace all the feeds too, because they will have different URLs (There is an URL persistence issue here) Fortunately we had only three “acquisitions” during the project.

- A kind of at least basic “normalization” was required as a starting point.

Why we did bother “normalizing” TOC RSS feeds

- To provide input for the Recommendations for Publishers

- To map aggregated feeds to a single “ideal” RSS schema

- To make the aggregation of feeds as automatic as possible

How bad, ugly and good were the feeds?

From 440 publishers:

- A hundred were “good”

- Two hundred were “normal”, though they gave us some work (“uglies”?)

- Hundred fifty were “bad”

“reusing” ticTOCs

ssantiago — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 12:32:49 +0000

http://webquery.blogspot.com/2009/03/rss-services-from-journals-in-library.html

http://www.crossref.org/CrossTech/2009/02/real_prism_in_the_rss_wilds.html

http://www.gale.cengage.com/reference/peter/200904/ticTOCs.htm

http://www.libology.com/blog/2009/03/19/tictocs-in-the-opac.html

http://roytennant.com/proto/peer/

http://jopml.org

http://blogs.hj.se/bibl/2009/04/07/tictocs-and-e-julia-integrated-with-julia/

http://www.attensa.com/blogs/attensa/

techXtra & Journal TOCs

Some experiences learned aggregating TOC RSS feeds from publishers

“reusing” ticTOCs