Electronic Resource License Metadata Project: Update 3
March 9th, 2010Week 05: February 22 – 26
This week I downloaded and tested the trial version of Abbey FineReader 10. The software has made noticeable improvements upon its previous version in its ability to recognized tiny or blurred text. This software also allows the conversion of an existing PDF to a machine readable and editable format. The upgrade from our “lite” version 9 to the “professional” version 10 apparently costs 179.99, but I need to get someone from their company to confirm this.
I also met with electronic acquisitions specialist who deals with connection problems and security breaches. Security breaches fall into two categories. One type is excessive use or downloading behavior of particular electronic resources, which show up in a breach log, which point out the user who is contacted and made aware of his violation. Another type is an E-Z Proxy server breach, which points out unusual use of Stanford network username (sunet ID) and password, usually from someplace oversees. Access issues consist of proxy setup problems, sunet ID problems, Firefox caching, network issues and problems with opening PDF’s.
Finally, I met with an analyst to discuss the E-Loader, which is a way to obtain MARC records from the vendor. Periodically, vendors send a file with information on newly purchased books, newly unavailable books and edits to existing records. Based upon the comparison of the vendor list and the library catalog, it is determined which MARC records need to be obtained. The MARC records that the vendor supplies still need to be verified for accuracy prior to applying them.
I also continued with license reviews.
Week 06: March 1 – 5
This week I installed Filemaker Pro 9.0 and began learning its operation. I accessed an e-book entitled, “Learn FileMaker Pro 9,” and began creating simple database tables. We have been working with a member of the SULAIR Tech Support department, who developed one possible database structure to help us get started. I eventually copied her database and began adding fields to various tables. Connecting relational tables has proved to be a challenge. My first project will be a single table consisting of all the fields they we came up with during the license sample review.
This week we gained access to a test version of Coral, the University of Notre Dame ERM software. This system uses drop down menus to apply descriptive terms to various license attributes, but mainly used notes fields where the actual passage can be copied and pasted. From our point of view, a major limitation is that the system only allows a single list of qualifiers (descriptive choices) to be used to describe all expression types (attributes). Out originally idea was to have unique sets qualifiers for each attribute. We will investigate the labor involved in modifying the code to better suit our needs.


