CDL-Hosted A&I Databases Transition Principles

Purpose:

• To guide decisions which must be made during the process
• To establish values for service quality which will raise the quality of services
• To inform outreach and instructional activities

1. Although the goal of providing a single user interface to all A&I database is no longer attainable, it is still desirable to provide as many databases under as few interfaces as possible.
2. Linking should be preserved and extended where possible. Specifically, this includes
3. • Linking to holdings in the Melvyl Catalog
   • Linking to full content from all publishers licensed by the CDL (not just those with whom the A&I vendors have agreements)
   • Linking to the Request service
4. To provide consistency for users, proprietary vendor solutions should be discouraged in favor of methods based on standards or solutions that can work with multiple vendors.

5. Examples:

   • For linking to content: use of the OpenURL standard rather than relying on campuses or vendors to "turn on" links to content individually.
   • For linking to holdings: use of the specifications for a "search URL" developed by CDL to "linkinto" the Melvyl Catalog and Periodicals databases rather than a vendor-specific method.
   • For authentication: use of certificates rather than special accounts.
   
   
   
6. The level and consistency of services should be improved for all A&I databases licensed by the CDL (and by individual campuses) from the selected vendors, not just those that were formerly hosted by the CDL. A similar improvement in services should be pursued for databases licensed from other vendors, using these vendors as examples and incentives.

   Example:

   • Update or current awareness services are available for all databases provided by a vendor.
   
   
   
7. Arrangements with selected vendors should accommodate existing campus agreements with those vendors so that accounts, statistics, and other administrative issues are handled efficiently and with appropriate flexibility.
8. We should be proactive in developing expertise and mechanisms for influencing the quality of vendor user interfaces and services.

9. Examples:

   • We should use our Resource Liaisons' experience to develop (or endorse other existing?) usability and user interface guidelines, and encourage vendors to adhere to them.
   • We should continue to strengthen the Resource Liaisons program to develop expertise within the group to aid in working with vendors and support them in being more influential with vendors.
   • We should stay abreast of initiatives and organizations (e.g, ICOLC) which might aid in influencing vendors.
10. Priorities for influencing vendor functionality enhancements should be user-driven.
11. Vendor and database evaluation and selection processes should be based on relevant principles and criteria established by the CDL's working groups.

12. Examples:

    • Tools and Services Working Group: Resource Selection/ Evaluation Criteria
    • Education Working Group: "Guiding Principles for CDL Education Programs" and "Usability Assessment Tool"