[WEB4LIB] RE: Meta-Search engines

[Eric Hellman]

I'm another interested party in this discussion. It seems to me that 
it's fair call SFX a proprietary product, even though it's 
commendably based on an open specification, OpenURL. Ex Libris should 
be commended for developing interoperable products, but if we called 
anything with an open API "non-proprietary" then we'd have to call 
both Windows and Mac Operating systems "non-proprietary" too.

Herbert van de Sompel has done an excellent job of documenting the 
open linking syntax underlying SFX. We've developed OpenURL- 
compatible systems without much difficulty, which is the real proof 
of the pudding. The only aspect we've noted where Ex-Libris could do 
a better job of being non-proprietary is the absence of a public 
vendor ID list.

We're positioning our LinkBaton redirection system as a secure 
alternative to the "CookiePusher" mentioned in the OpenURL proposal. 
LinkBaton, like SFX, is "proprietary", but based on open linking 
interfaces, including OpenURL, and it works well with SFX.

Something like Jake (http://jake.med.yale.edu/), on the other hand, 
is REALLY a non-proprietary system.

Eric

At 5:32 AM -0700 9/28/00, Michael Kaplan wrote:
>By and large, I think vendors should refrain from posting to lists since
>their postings are invariably biased.  However, since our competitor
>specifically invited us to respond, we believe we should set the record
>straight regarding our products.
>
>Specifically, this message is in response to the current thread on
>Meta-Search engines written by Karim Boughida (Endeavor) wherein the comment
>was made on Endeavor’s ENCompass product that “...I don’t think we have a
>real competitor. Among perceived competitors we have SFX. SFX is a
>proprietary reference-linking product.”
>
>Let me say up-front I am the Director for Product Management for Ex Libris
>(USA), Inc., so I have a stake in setting the record straight. On the other
>hand, many of you know that I spent 20+ years in 2 of the largest ARL sites
>in the US and left Indiana University (where I was Director of Technical
>Services) for Ex Libris only last February.  I believe very much in academic
>discourse and integrity.
>
>So why am I upset?  There is a mantra afoot among competitors to Ex Libris’
>ALEPH500 and potential competitors to SFX that SFX is a ‘proprietary linking
>product’. This is as far from the truth as one can get. SFX has been
>specifically designed as an open product. (In general, see
>http://www.sfxit.com/.) It will work with Ex Libris’ ALEPH500 system, but it
>can also work with any other ILS system. To further underscore this fact,
>when SFX was Beta tested, only one of the sites in the testing was an ALEPH
>site, ALL other sites were using competitors' ILS systems!
>
>But what makes SFX truly open and non-proprietary?  It is the very basis of
>SFX’s linking protocols and syntax: the OpenURL.  (For a technical
>explanation of the OpenURL, see
>http://sfx1.exlibris-usa.com/OpenURL/openurl.html) Ex Libris has been
>working assiduously with information providers and with standards
>organizations to further define the OpenURL as an industry-wide standard.
>(See http://www.sfxit.com/sfx2.html). Ex Libris has already begun
>discussions with NISO to have the OpenURL considered a standard.
>
>What is more, Ex Libris and the academic Beta test sites and information
>providers with which it is working are supporting the OpenURL in preference
>to proprietary standards (http://www.sfxit.com/sources.html).  SFX already
>has agreements in place and works with the following organizations:
>
>ArXiv.org
>EBSCO
>Institute of Physics
>ISI
>OCLC First Search
>Ovid
>SilverPlatter ERL
>SLAC-SPIRES
>
>More agreements are on the horizon.
>
>What of the target end of the equation?  Ex Libris has configured SFX to
>work with a large number of target providers or sites, best viewed at
>http://www.sfxit.com/targets.html.
>
>Beyond that, a larger number of publishers and content providers has already
>agreed to adopt the OpenURL even in advance of any formal recognition of it
>as an industry standard.  Clearly, we are not taking a “proprietary”
>approach here.
>
>More important in this thread, however, is Ex Libris’ MetaLib, another
>product that works with systems supporting standards (and again, does not
>require an ALEPH system as its basis). MetaLib is a portal that provides for
>information discovery of MAB, MARC21, XML, EAD, Dublin Core, and TEI
>resources. The product is now being tested in Europe (soon in the US) and is
>being readied for installations around the world. Ex Libris made a conscious
>decision to make MetaLib and SFX work with other systems and resources and
>not to limit them to users of the ALEPH500 library management system.
>
>Another Ex Libris’ product offering, DigiTooLibrary, will help libraries
>create and manage their digital collections. One of the beauties of this
>product, again, is that it can stand alone—it does not require an ALEPH
>system to be in place. We call these “open systems” and that is where we don
>’t see a lot of competition!
>
>I don’t want to do a sales pitch here.  I invite you to visit our website
>(www.exlibris-usa.com ) to obtain more information on these products. But I
>do want to make sure that everyone is aware that not only are there
>competitive offerings in the marketplace, but also that there are some truly
>“NON-proprietary” offerings.  That means you have real, open choices.  We
>invite you to do your own comparison and decide for yourself if there is a
>“real competitor” available.
>
>Michael Kaplan
>Director of Product Management
>Ex Libris (USA), Inc.
>michael at exlibris-usa.com

Eric Hellman
Openly Informatics, Inc.
http://www.openly.com/           21st Century Information Infrastructure
LinkBaton: Your Links that Learn     http://my.linkbaton.com/