Proposal Submitted to the Business Information Topic Committee
Last updated May 26, 2009
The following proposed work item is submitted by Tim Jewell (Director, Information Resources and
Scholarly Communication, University of Washington Libraries) and Ivy Anderson (Director of Collections,
California Digital Library).
Background and Problem Statement:
The Electronic Resource Management Initiative (ERMI) began with a “pre-standardization” workshop cosponsored by NISO and the Digital Library Federation (DLF) in 2002, 1 and then proceeded under DLF auspices to develop “common specifications and tools for managing the license agreements, related administrative information, and internal processes associated with collections of licensed electronic resources.” 2 It resulted in the August 2004 document, Electronic Resource Management: The Report of the DLF Initiative , 3 which included a data model, data dictionary, statement of functional requirements, and other documents that became an informal standard for the early development of ERM systems.
A second phase of the Initiative, begun in 2005, focused on “data standards, issues related to license expression and usage data” and was completed in late 2008.
3 Three standards-related projects affiliated with “ERMI 2” attracted interest and support within the library and vendor communities and are now supported by NISO. These include recommendations for ILS/ERMS interoperability data standards, which is now proceeding as the NISO CORE (Cost of Resource Exchange) initiative under the direction of the
CORE Working Group, 4 and development of the Standardized Usage Statistics Harvesting Initiative
(SUSHI) Protocol standard (ANSI/NISO Z39.93), managed by the SUSHI advisory group.
5 In addition, a review and mapping of the ERMI “terms of use” data elements to the ONIX-PL format to enable exchange of license information was undertaken by what is now the NISO/EDItEUR ONIX-PL Working Group.
6
A review of the ERMI Data Dictionary that might have led to it or some of its elements being considered as a formal standard had also been planned as part of ERMI 2, but was not undertaken due to lack of time. In late 2008, as the ERMI 2 project was nearing completion , Todd Carpenter, NISO’s Managing
Director, began discussions with Peter Brantley, Executive Director of DLF, regarding the future of ERMI.
In those discussions, NISO agreed to perform a needs assessment with respect to ERMI and broader
ERM-related data needs and standards, and to assume any appropriate maintenance responsibilities.
Subsequently, a subgroup of NISO’s Business Information Topic Committee 7 was tasked with surveying this landscape to determine what, if any, further steps should be undertaken by NISO.
1 “NISO/DLF Workshop on Standards for Electronic Resource Management (Chicago, IL, May 10, 2002).”
National Informaiton Standards Organization (NISO) . http://www.niso.org/news/events/niso/past/NISO-DLFwkshp/
2 DLF Electronic Resource Management Initiative. Digital Library Federation (DLF) , July 12, 2006. http://www.diglib.org/standards/dlf-erm02.htm
3 Jewell, Timothy D., et al. “Electronic Resource Management: Report of the DLF ERM Initiative.” Digital Library
Federation (DLF) , 2004. http://www.diglib.org/pubs/dlf102/
3 Jewell, Tim. “DLF Electronic Resources Management Initiative, Phase II: Final Report.” Digital Library
Federation (DLF) , December 30, 2008. http://www.diglib.org/standards/ERMI2_Final_Report_20081230.pdf
4 “CORE (Cost of Resource Exchange).” National Information Standards Organization (NISO) . http://www.niso.org/workrooms/core
5 “Standardized Usage Statistics Harvesting Initiative (SUSHI).” http://www.niso.org/workrooms/sushi/
6 “ONIX-PL Working Group.” National Information Standards Organization (NISO) . http://www.niso.org/apps/org/workgroup/onixpl/
4 The Business Information Topic Committee subgroup included Tim Jewell (University of Washington) and Ivy
Anderson (California Digital Library), with the support of NISO staff Todd Carpenter and Karen A. Wetzel.
Page 1 of 3

ERM Data Standards Review: A NISO New Work Item Proposal
Submitted to the Business Information Topic Committee 5/26/09
During ALA Midwinter 2009, several informal focus groups were gathered to solicit feedback on the status of ERMI and the needs of the community. In addition, a NISO Open Teleconference was held in March
2009 for the same purpose. Three themes were noted from those information-gathering efforts:
1. Importance of the data model/reference model aspect of ERMI and an interest in some kind of role in continuing it, with particular reference to the entity diagram and its gaps. Hot topics included identities and authorities, and relationship of products to vendors in a way that is transferable.
2. Continuing interest in maintenance of a data dictionary of some kind, but an evolving one.
3. Interest in having some kind of recommended practice to help libraries that are implementing
ERMs.
This proposal is an outcome of the ERMI landscape review and proposes next steps in this area.
Statement of Work:
This proposal is to create a new NISO working group to undertake a “gap analysis” regarding ERMrelated data and standards, and to make recommendations regarding the future of the ERMI data dictionary within that broader context.
The analysis will begin with a review of the ERMI data dictionary as it presently exists, and a mapping of
ERMI data elements to those within relevant standards-related projects (e.g., CORE, SUSHI, ONIX-PL, etc.). Vendors, libraries using ERM systems, and other identified stakeholders will then be consulted via surveys and/or more in-depth interviews to solicit additional feedback.
The deliverable will be a report for the Business Information Topic Committee highlighting current work that provides solutions for specific areas of ERM use, identifies gaps where work has not been done, and recommends appropriate further work.
Partners and Participation:
Working Group Membership:

Libraries involved in implementing and using ERM systems from a range of library types
(academic, public, special, consortia) will form the core of the review group since they are the constituency served by ERM systems.

Representatives of ERM system vendors may also be appropriate to serve on the group.
Review and consultation would involve the following additional representatives and constituencies:

ERM system vendors: expertise in developing solutions and bringing them to market

Publishers and other information providers: especially, licensing and account administration experts, including expertise in communication of key business information between vendors and customers

Subscription agents: expertise in title management, subscription management, and account administration, including communication of key business information between vendors and customers

LITA/ALCTS Electronic Resources Interest Group

ALCTS Publisher/Vendor Relations Interest Group

ALCTS E-Resources Management Interest Group

CLIR (Council on Library and Information Resources)
Timeline:
 June 2009: Appointment of Working Group or other Participants
 July 2009: Finalize Work Plan
 August – October 2009: Complete Initial ERMI Data Dictionary Mapping
 November 2009 – February 2010: Complete Interviews/Outreach
Page 2 of 3

ERM Data Standards Review: A NISO New Work Item Proposal
Submitted to the Business Information Topic Committee 5/26/09
 February – April 2010: Finalize Report and Recommendations
 April 2010: Publish Report
Funding: n/a
Page 3 of 3