Journal of Applied Communications

Volume 95 Issue 1 Article 4

Improving Discoverability, Preventing Broken Links: Considerations for Land-Grant University Publishers

Mark Anderson-Wilk

Follow this and additional works at: https://newprairiepress.org/jac

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 License.

Recommended Citation Anderson-Wilk, Mark (2011) "Improving Discoverability, Preventing Broken Links: Considerations for Land- Grant University Publishers," Journal of Applied Communications: Vol. 95: Iss. 1. https://doi.org/10.4148/ 1051-0834.1175

This Research is brought to you for free and open access by New Prairie Press. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Applied Communications by an authorized administrator of New Prairie Press. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Improving Discoverability, Preventing Broken Links: Considerations for Land- Grant University Publishers

Abstract Publishers of online resources, including Extension publishing units at land-grant universities, are generally concerned about the discoverability of the resources they publish. Broken links create an obstacle between potential audiences and Extension resources, and thus reduce discoverability. This study examines the feasibility of Extension publishers using metadata (information about resources), digital object identifiers (instead of URLs), and/or institutional epositr ories (in combination with Extension catalogs) to improve the discoverability of their published resources. The use of rich, standardized metadata is recommended as a best practice in digital publishing. The Digital Object Identifier System provides publishers with tools to ensure persistent discoverability; however, the cost and time requirements may be impediments for some Extension publishers. Institutional repositories such as DSpace are underutilized and offer many benefits for Extension publishers ot consider. In particular, using an institutional repository may be a low-investment option for Extension publishers to provide both access to and preservation of digital resources.

Keywords Publishers, feasibility, Dspac, digital resources, metadata

This research is available in Journal of Applied Communications: https://newprairiepress.org/jac/vol95/iss1/4 !"#"$%&' 1 Volume 95, No. 1 • 36 !"#$%&'()#*+',-./$ Applied Communications, Journal of Anderson-Wilk: Improving Discoverability, Preventing Broken Links: Consideration Links: Broken Preventing Discoverability, Improving Anderson-Wilk:

A common interest among publishers of online materials is the discoverability of the resources discoverabilityThe primary study is the reduced the current of Extension by addressed problem docu- (2002) Brooks and Markwell web. the on problem critical a as identified been has rot Link 3'1#+(421.+' major as universities, Land-grant 2004). Lossau, 2006; Stranak, 2008; (Schnittman, publish they that providers of public education need materials, to improve the discoverability of the resources devel- oped by their including communities, their Extension Services charged with the mission of public This outreach 2007). study (Heatley, evaluates current and potential systems used to facilitate the discoverability of materials published by the communications offices that publish public education materials at land-grant behalf of Extension universities. on links commonly occur when Broken rot. as link also known links, time due to broken over resources resources are removed from a website or when a website is reorganized 2006). Users encounter (Stranack, this 2006; problem Paskin, when they either click on a hyperlink or enter an address error. in Found” “404 Not a bar and they receive address browser’s their web mented the problem of link rot for distance educationOver courses. a period of 16.5% 13 months, disappearance “Theprogressive concluded, They exist. to ceased courses online in cited URLs the of of materials presents a major problem for courses developed to utilize these resources extensively” (Markwell Another 107). and p. study 2002, Brooks, found that “nearly 20% of Internet addresses &0*1#"21 gener- are universities, land-grant at units publishing Extension including resources, online of Publishers ally concerned about the discoverability of the resources they publish. Broken links create an obstacle be- tween potential audiences and Extension resources, and thus This reduce study discoverability. examines the feasibility of Extension publishers using metadata (information about resources), digital object iden- tif iers (instead of URLs), and/or institutional repositories (in combination with Extension catalogs) to improve the discoverability ofThe use their of standardized published is resources. rich, metadata recom- mended as The a Digital best Object practice in Identif digital publishing. ier System provides publishers with tools to ensure persistent discoverability; the however, cost and time requirements may be impedi- offer underutilizedand are DSpace as such repositories Institutional publishers. Extension some for ments many benef its for Extension publishers to In consider. using particular, an institutional repository may be a low-investment option for Extension publishers to provide both access to and preservation of digital resources. !"#$%&'()*+',-%&.$/0'1'234*5$.&.(2'()* 6$%7.(*8'(7,9*:%(,';.$/2'%(,*<%$*8/(;= >$/(2*?('&.$,'23*5@01',A.$, !"#"$%&' Published by New Prairie Press, 2017 !"#"$%&' 2 Volume 95, No. 1 • 37 Applied Communications, Journal of Journal of Applied Communications, Vol. 95, Iss. 1 [2011], Art. 4 Art. [2011], Iss. 1 95, Vol. Communications, Applied of Journal

A literature review was conducted to provide a foundation for understanding the potential of identifyingusuallyincludes key metadata publishing, of field the In data. about data is Metadata Over the a years, variety of communities have established metadata standards for specific pur- 221), p. 1998, al., et (Moura useful” data makes that “information as described been has Metadata In 2003, Salokhe et al. (2003) argued that if resources were consistently published with well- Google as such engines search common that bemoaned (2006) Ward however, later, fewA years When URLs are used as launching points for finding discovery, a broken link rather than the A number of solutions have been developed to help publishers reduce the problem of broken

5.1)#"14#)%6)7.)8 discovery-rich and DOIs, metadata, institutional repositories to enhance the discoverability of on- has persistence link discoverabilityand resource on knowledge of state The resources. published line and librarycommunity, the industry, publishing the within research of years through developed been information technologists. 9.*2+7)#:,#.2;%!)1"("1" and descriptive information about a published publisher, resource description, such as creator, title, 2003). Brand et al., 2003; format and (Kasdorf, date, was standard (MARC) Cataloging Machine-Readable Congress’s Libraryof the example, For poses. created in the 1960s to help libraries classify More re- and catalog 1998). documents (Moura et al., common a as developed was elements metadata 15 of Set Element Metadata Core Dublin the cently, vocabulary metadata interoperability facilitate to informationand sharing Internetthe (Brand on et 2007). Heatley, 2006; Stranack, 2004; Awre, 2003; al., can Metadata used. is resource the how and whether affects metadata resource’s published becausea improve the discoverability of a published resource and can facilitate the exchange of a variety of information related to the resource – for in example, rights and e-commerce, management, library 2003). Brand et al., 2003; services (Kasdorf, structured neither metadata, locators such as URLs nor identifiers such as DOIs would be neces- to allow for and retrievals accurate search be sufficient of itself would The metadata sary longer. any information. meta- “need we that argues Ward so, Even rankings. relevance their in metadata keyword use not do data not only to record and trace information but objects, to reaffirm their currency of cred- trust, in a web-rich high school science in curriculum the course became of inactive” seven months (Del- 787). p. 2003, lavalle et al., for potentially (and publisher resource the and seeker resource the both for loss a is resource expected “linkingenrichesactivityboth that an is it, puts (2003) Hellman As well). as third-partythe referrer for burden maintenance web ongoing an create also links Broken 181). (p. linkee” the and linker the 2002). (Kiernan, the future links up to date into website’s wishing to keep their anyone links and increase the discoverability of This published study resources. evaluates the potential for address to repositories institutional and/or (DOIs), identifiers object digital discovery-richmetadata, Spe- publish. they discoverabilityresources the the of regarding have publishers Extension concerns cific research objectives include (1) assessing whether Extension publishers are using DOIs and/or repositories institutional and (2) determining whether forit be would beneficial publish- Extension repositories. and institutional DOIs, their use of discovery-richers to increase metadata,

!"#"$%&'

DOI: 10.4148/1051-0834.1175 https://newprairiepress.org/jac/vol95/iss1/4 !"#"$%&' 3 , Volume 95, No. 1 • 38 Applied Communications, Journal of Anderson-Wilk: Improving Discoverability, Preventing Broken Links: Consideration Links: Broken Preventing Discoverability, Improving Anderson-Wilk: Plan to Develop a Digital Information Infrastructure to Manage Land Grant Information

In the The digital locators (addresses) and identifiers (names) associated with published resources on Locators are web addresses that are intended to point The users uniform to resource resources. pub- The 2005). (Paskin, resources to given names permanent unique, are contrast, in Identifiers, Identifiers can be used for etc.) any learning and digital objects, images, at media (publications, han- agencies Registration DOIFoundation. International the by DOISystem managed The is The publisher works with its registration agency to use DOIs for its Pub-published resources. ibility and authority…. Metadata provides the essential link between the information creator and the and creator information the between link essential the provides Metadata authority…. and ibility 2). (p. information user” Randall Heatley (2007) of Michigan State University recommends that land-grant universities de- velop metadata-rich institutional repositories. He recommends using the Dublin Core Metadata Element Set and metadata harvesting tools to facilitate sharing among land-grantof resources uni- versities. 9.<.1"/%=0>)21%3()'1.?.)#* yet related, are Locatorsidentifiers and accessibility. discoverabilityand ongoing their affect web the 2005). distinct in important ways (Paskin, locator (URL) is a widely recognized type oftenof locator, being used resource a as locate to a upon reference relied be link always cannot or URLs typed earlier, noted As bar. address browser’s a into because URLs commonly become broken A links. variety of solutions (such as OpenURL and the persistent uniform resource locator [PURL]) have been developed to create 2004). location (Rapple, URLs current a servicethrough users to a resource’s redirects that that “resolve” lishing industry has a long history of using identifiers for published works the (e.g., International Standard Book Number [ISBN]). In recent digital years, identification systems (such as the DOI System) have been developed to provide mechanisms for users to find the current web location of a (its DOI). using its identifier resource sized forany or unit) chapter, foreach book, granularitywhole for a used be any could identifier (an should identifiers have the unique, following qualities: be effective, To 2006). Paskin, 2003; (Powell, persistent, resolvable, usable in web browsers, usable in nondigital environments (can be printed, dictated simple over transportable to the and assign, between phone), free locations, at the point of publishing digital in used widely is and qualities these provides SystemDOI The 2003). (Powell, use 2006). 2005, (Paskin, dle the registration of DOI names and provide a variety of related services to A choicepublishers publisher’s of registration 2005). agency is (Paskin, based on which agency’s services best meet the Cross- agency widelyeducationCrossRef. most higher is The in registration used needs. publisher’s Ref specializes in reference linking of scholarly works and supports rich metadata for the resources registration DOI a also now is agency, ISBN long-time the Bowker, R.R. 2003). (Kasdorf, registered agency serving the general publishing market. ensures that system a following resources to names DOI assign and prefix name DOI a obtain lishers The publisher then submits uniqueness. the DOI along with current web location and metadata to which deposits the the information registration If agency, in the the location DOI of directory. the resource changes, the publisher updates the URL in one place (through their registration agency) as opposed to the 2006), URL needing to be updated in every (Pentz, place a URL exists, reference which of course is impractical. !"#"$%&' Published by New Prairie Press, 2017 !"#"$%&' 4 Volume 95, No. 1 • 39 Applied Communications, Journal of Journal of Applied Communications, Vol. 95, Iss. 1 [2011], Art. 4 Art. [2011], Iss. 1 95, Vol. Communications, Applied of Journal

The DOI resolution service can be used in two ways. A DOI name can be entered into the “Re- the into entered be can name DOI A ways. two servicein used be resolution canDOI The CrossRef also provides a number of resolution and linking services geared toward the needs of Paskin, 2006; Wilensky, and (Kahn System Handle the of implementation an is System DOI The access provide and archive to used systems management asset digital are repositories Institutional new repositories been Institutional heraldedhave strat- as revolutionary“a and transformative – Blythe and Chachra (2005) note the great variety of digital media that can be housed in and “an Information, Networked for Coalition the of director (2003), Lynch A. Clifford to According Lynch (2003) also framed the institutional repository as a mechanism for public universities to The value and utility of institutional repositories have been well Foster and documented. Gib- Universities customize institutional repository software for their identity and needs. Smith

solve a box at DOI the Name” International DOI or website Foundation the (http://www.doi.org) DOI can be written in URL form by appending the DOI name to http://dx.doi.org/ and entering this into the address bar of In a either web the browser. case, user is immediately redirected to the 2006). 2005, (Paskin, URL current researchers – for example, automated cross-publisher reference linking and a function called “for- article(this the articles newcite as future the into metadata article’s an updates which linking,” ward 2006). (Pentz, feature) “this article …” as a appears by has been cited sometimes Another 2006). application of the Handle System is the DSpace institutional repository software, “handles.” as object identifiers which to digital refers 3'*1.141.+'"/%6)@+*.1+#.)* 2003). Rogers, 2003; (Chan, community university a of members the by produced materials digital to information share to (able interoperable metadata-rich, searchable, typicallyopen, are systems These 2004). Ware, 2002; and perpetual (Crow, with other systems), in place taking changes accelerate to leverage systematic serious, apply to universities allows egythat 1). p. 2003, (Lynch, scholarship and scholarly communication” delivered through institutional repositories – not just text and but video, PDFs, also audio, photos, and learning objects. recordings, session-captured data sets, animations, institutional repository is a recognition that the intellectual life and scholarship of our universities primarya that respon- and form, digital in shared and documented, represented, be increasingly will sibility of our universities is to exercise stewardship over these riches: both to make them available 2). (p. and to preserve them” address their responsibilities to “It the public: is a new channel for structuring the university’s con- tribution to the This broader 3). view world” (p. of the institutional repository fits with the public service Service of land-grant and the Extension missions institutions in particular. bons (2005) interviewed faculty at their institution (University of Rochester) to identify the faculty needs and They interests that concluded might be that servedthe in- by an institutional repository. reposi- of value greatest the is work faculty to access users providing of function repository stitutional institutional of usability the about information Though perspective. faculty individual the from tories repositorycollections 2007), (McKay, limited is perspective seeker information the from repositories 2006). (Organ, Google searches through discovered to be well been shown have (2002) explains that communities within an institution define what collections they would like to and create, each community defines the policies and procedures it will use to acquire material into its The collections. university library typically assumes asset management responsibilities (Tansley

!"#"$%&'

DOI: 10.4148/1051-0834.1175 https://newprairiepress.org/jac/vol95/iss1/4 !"#"$%&' 5 Volume 95, No. 1 • 40 Applied Communications, Journal of Anderson-Wilk: Improving Discoverability, Preventing Broken Links: Consideration Links: Broken Preventing Discoverability, Improving Anderson-Wilk:

1) Confirm you have a professional connection to Extension publishing. (yes required continue) to 2) Indicate which of the following best represents your position. (unit head/management, or other) IT/web developer, editor/production, im- videos, publications, online publications, (print publish? you do Whatobjects typesof 3) and/or other) e-learning modules, websites, including podcasts, files, audio ages, 4) What audiences do you serve? (public, practitioners, policy makers, researchers, and/or other) 5) Indicate somewhatfamiliarityyour with DOIs and/or the (veryHandle System. familiar, or unfamiliar) familiar, 6) Indicate which of the following best represents your organization’s practices related to DOIs/Handle System. (use DOIs/Handle System, have considered but do not use DOIs/ know) or don’t using DOIs/Handle not considered have System, Handle System, (short answer) experience7) Describe with DOIs your or other permanent locator systems. 8) Indicate which potential benefits of DOIs/Handle System are relevant concerns of your organization. (reduce broken links, provide an alternative to long URLs, content appears more prominently and accurately in indexes and search persistent engines, better metadata, know) and/or don’t of digital assets and intellectual management property, af- cost this would $500, approximately were DOIs use to publisher a for cost annual the If 9) because DOIs implement not (yes—would system? DOI the implement to decision your fect a be not would cost no—the decision, our in factor a be would cost perhaps—the cost, the of know) or don’t in our decision, factor links, of updating DOIs effortimplementing (one-time and in time the involved Would 10) imple- to decision your affect published) are items when database a into metadata of entering Data were collected using two methods: (1) a survey of individuals working in Extension pub- A survey was used to gather information regarding the current practices and decision factors of The most common institutional repository systems include DSpace developed at the Massachu- the at developed DSpaceincluderepository systems institutional common most The States(Kim, United the in used widely is which DSpace, primarilyfocuses on study current The !)1;+(* web. the on publishing practices identifiable (2) a review Extension and of current lishing, A4#7):%+?%BC1)'*.+'%D40/.*;)#* Extension publishers. An online questionnaire with nine multiple choice questions and one short as follows: were The questions was developed. question answer et al., 2005). Most institutional repositories 2005). adhere to standards et such al., as the Dublin Core Metadata Element Set and support the Open Archives Initiative protocol for metadata Users canharvesting. 2004). (Ware, mechanisms search varietyof a through repositories institutional in materials discover University Southamptonthe developedof at 2001, in EPrints 2002, in Technology of Institute setts initially at developed Fedora 2007, since Press Electronic Berkeley distributedby Commons Digital in 2000. Waikato developed at the University of and Greenstone Cornell University in 1997, 2005) and which uses the Handle System to establish persistent identifiers (handles) for published DSpace repositories. have land-grant institutional universities Many 2004). objects (Chan, !"#"$%&' Published by New Prairie Press, 2017 !"#"$%&' 6

Volume 95, No. 1 • 41 95.2% 95.2% 81.0% 76.2% 66.7% Percent of respondents Applied Communications, grant Extension publishers. publishers. Extension grant - Journal of

. 20 17 16 14 Number of respondents of Number Journal of Applied Communications, Vol. 95, Iss. 1 [2011], Art. 4 Art. [2011], Iss. 1 95, Vol. Communications, Applied of Journal

The survey results included 21 responses from land confirmed responses 21 included results survey The

The survey asked respondents to confirm their position was in Extension communications/pub- Extension in was position their confirm to survey The respondents asked indicated The that respondents they publish the following typesprinted publications of objects: ment ment the DOI system? (yes—would not implement DOIs because of the time and effort, perhaps—would need more information/consideration, no—the time and effort know) required or don’t in our decision, a factor not be would An email invitation to complete the questionnaire was distributed to members of the Associa- The website of a publisher can be reviewed to determine whether the publisher uses digital ob- The 61 online publishing sites were reviewed to identify which types of online locators/identi-

Practitioners Note. Table 1 Table Audiences served by Extension publishersAudience responding to survey Public Policy Makers Researchers F.'(.'<* The lishing. responses showed that within Extension publishing the respondents represented unit n IT/web development (19.0%, n = 6), (28.6%, editor/production n = 8), (38.1%, head/management n = 3). and other (14.3%, = 4), n (85.7%, = online 18), publications n (81.0%, = websites n 17), (71.4%, images/photographs =15), n (28.6%, modules e-learning and 10), = n (47.6%, videos 11), = n (52.4%, files audio =11), n (52.4%, 1. Table in publishing efforts presented are The audiences served the respondents’ by = 6). tion tion for Communication Excellence publishing and information technology special interest groups through their number Targeted listservs. of recipients was The 76. message “Thisstated, survey is forwardplease materials; Extension publish that units from person one by completed be to intended 27.6% a for individuals 21 by completed was survey The person.” appropriate most the to request this rate. response 6)7.)8%+?%E4##)'1%D#"21.2)* ject identifiers or an institutional repository to publish its online In resources. order to review the from obtained was land-grant of institutions list a Service Extension of practices current publishers, of of A the these search websites land-grant of the PublicAssociation and Land-grant Universities. materialsdigital published 61 sites, these Of presence. Extension an with foundsites 75 institutions appear not did 14 remaining the and listings) page web or database catalog online an (through online to publish materials online. they when resource a to results search of list or page web a from users direct to used being were fiers stan- recorded: was following the of use publishers’ Extension the Specifically, it. to link clickthe on DSpace DOIs, dard institutional URLs, repository with and/or handles, other institutional reposi- tory software with persistent locators.

!"#"$%&'

DOI: 10.4148/1051-0834.1175 https://newprairiepress.org/jac/vol95/iss1/4 !"#"$%&' 7

Percent of Volume 95, No. 1 • 42 respondents

19 17 90.5% 15 81.0% 13 71.4% 61.9% Applied Communications, Number of of Number respondents Journal of 15 71.4% -grant universities. universities. -grant

Anderson-Wilk: Improving Discoverability, Preventing Broken Links: Consideration Links: Broken Preventing Discoverability, Improving Anderson-Wilk:

Both the survey and review of current practices involved data gathering related to Extension When asked to indicate familiarity with the DOI/Handleonly 14.3% (n = System, 3) of survey When asked whether they have considered using the DOI/Handle System, 14.3% (n = 3) of The survey and the review of current practices together provided data related to understanding of understanding to related data provided together practices current of review the and survey The the of discoverability the identified overwhelmingsurvey the to responding publishers Extension The DOI System and institutional repositories are two solutions that can be used to minimize reposi- institutional and/or SystemDOI the by offered solutions the that confirm responses The Issue of concern Reduce broken links indexes in accurately and permanently more toappear Content engines search and Persistent metadata property intellectual and assets ofdigital management Better Provide an alternative to long URLs Table 2 Table Issues of concern for Extension publishers at land F"H./."#.1:%8.1;%9=3*%"'(%3'*1.141.+'"/%6)@+*.1+#.)* persistence the increase to repositories institutional and DOIs of use and familiaritywith publishers’ and discoverability digital resources. of online onlysome- either indicated theywere remaining The very indicated theywere familiar. respondents con- not have “We stated, respondent One 9). = n (42.9%, unfamiliar or 9) = n (42.9%, familiar what I survey, your to thanks However, them. with familiar not were because we now before them sidered useful be could DOIs that opinion the of am this, on based and material, background some read have and solve a number of problems.” have 5) = (n 23.8% Another DOI/Handlethe System. use currently they that indicated respondents 33.3% (n = 7) not have considered but do not In use addition, considered the DOI/Handle System. the problem, familiarity with the and problem, use of technologies to increase the persistence and discoverability and preservation. access, time, to cost, related factors and decision resources, of online G'()#*1"'(.'<%+?%1;)%D#+0/)H a as links broken identified 19) = (n 90.5% Specifically, concern. of issue an as publish they resources prominently more appear to resources published their for desire a indicated 17) = (n 81.0% problem, and accurately and in 71.4% indexes (n and = search engines, 15) acknowledged the need for infor- consistently into the future. available to be more their resources about (metadata) mation provid- were Surveyrespondents resources. of discoverability the increase and rot link of problem the DOIthe System by repositories institutional and/or addressed are that problems specific of list a ed asked to indicate relevant concerns of their organizations. which of the issues are and were 2). Table for publishers (see concern Extension issues of common multiple tories address !"#"$%&' Published by New Prairie Press, 2017 !"#"$%&' 8

Percent Volume 95, No. 1 • 43

0 0.0% 9 3 14.8% 4.9% 61 100% Number Applied Communications, Journal of Extension websites that were were that websites Extension grant

resources are currently handled by Extension publishers.

Journal of Applied Communications, Vol. 95, Iss. 1 [2011], Art. 4 Art. [2011], Iss. 1 95, Vol. Communications, Applied of Journal

The total sample of 61 websites includes those land- those includes of websites 61 total sample The

While all sites used URLs through a traditional online catalog or some webpage land- listings, Extension materials that are published using DSpace and its Handle System were identified Extension materials using also Berkeley Electronic foundwere in other repository systems (e.g., Several survey to assess whether the costs and asked time respondents questions associated with The survey provided an estimate of the annual cost for an Extension publisher to use the DOI

The review of current practices provided data on how links to online published resources are cur- are resources published online to links how on data provided practices current of review The

Published objects linked using handles from DSpace institutional repository Published objects linked using standard URLs from catalog database of webpage listings Published objects linked using DOI System Published objects linked using persistent locators from other institutional repository software Note. resources. digital publish to found Table 3 Table How links to online published Extension publisher practice grant universities also provide some focus of to appears their date to Extension materials Extension materials for repositories through institutional of the use The university’s institu- repository. tional on specific types of resources (e.g., historical publications and special collections). No publisher exclusively Extension repository an institutional uses catalog. online for its entire in the following land-grant institutional repositories: Cornell University’s Ohio eCommons, State University’s Knowledge Bank, Oregon State University’s ScholarsArchive, Texas A&M’s Reposi- the tory, University of Hawaii’s ScholarSpace, the University of Illinois’s the IDEALS, University of Maryland’s DRUM, the University of Minnesota’s Digital and Conservancy, the University of MOspace. Missouri’s Digital Commons software) Press’s at other Although land-grantthese repositories universities. do discoverable metadata. and rich, they do offer stable URLs relatively not use the Handle System, 9)2.*.+'%F"21+#*%6)/"1)(%1+%E+*1%"'(%I.H) implementing DOIs and institutional repositories would affect their decision to invest in the these technologies of discoverability. registra- DOI a to membership annual of projection conservative a was estimate This ($500). System using using the DOI/Handle System, and 28.6% (n = 6) know didn’t whether such a system had considered. been Exten- practice, general a As 3). Table (see websites their on publishers Extension handledby rently sion publishing websites provide links to published resources using standard URLs from a catalog found to use DOIs. sites were No listings. page database or web

!"#"$%&'

DOI: 10.4148/1051-0834.1175 https://newprairiepress.org/jac/vol95/iss1/4 !"#"$%&' 9 Volume 95, No. 1 • 44 Applied Communications, Journal of Anderson-Wilk: Improving Discoverability, Preventing Broken Links: Consideration Links: Broken Preventing Discoverability, Improving Anderson-Wilk:

The perceived cost and time required to implement the DOI System appear to be barriers to Survey respondents provided a number of specific comments regarding costs: “Due to recent The survey described the time and effort required to implement the DOI/Handle System as Extension publishers face the challenge of at once providing a wide variety of audiences access One respondent explained his or her unit’s experience as follows: “Our library has in the past 9.*24**.+' E+*1%"'(%I.H) adoption. In particular, the benefits of the DOI System are necessary the system. modest investment enough to justify the relatively generally from to benefit not perceived to be great tion tion agency and going-forward (not including past content) DOI deposit fees for an average-sized sys-DOI the implement to decision their affect would cost this Whenif asked publisher. Extension = (n 57.1% DOIs implement not becausethey that would cost, the of responded 3) = (n 14.3% tem, cost the that responded 2) = (n 9.5% decision, their in factor a be would cost the that responded 12) would know not whether and be 19.0% a (n factor = in 4) their that responded decision, they didn’t affect the decision. the cost would budget cuts we strugglingare to keep up with demands current but hope to move this up in our list and “Fees work required looked like soon.” more tryingthan we wanted to We’re to save deal with. “I would say this our year especially.” Extension IT money, group is updating its e-publishing after about 10 years of Ouralmost standing still. group is also very conservative about perceived value of expenditures.” follows: A one-time updating of links used on web pages and in publications catalogs and ongoing that (Note published. are items as system a into etc.) location, description, (title, metadata of entering within a installation university, and management of institutional repository software are units/com- university participating typicallyof responsibility the not libraryand its through centrallyhandled Whenmunities.) respondents were asked if the time and effort of required them would affect their DOIs implement not would they said 2) = (n 9.5% DOI/HandleSystem, the implement to decision informationdetermine to more need theysaid would 14) = (n 66.7% becauseeffort, and time the of would required effort and time the said 3) = (n 14.3% it, worth be would effort and time the whether not be a factor in and their 9.5% decision, (n know = whether 2) this One didn’t would be a factor. indicatedrespondent that DOI/Handle System implementation did not have high priority because a deadline.it did not have 9)2.*.+'%F"21+#*%6)/"1)(%1+%D#)*)#7.'<%6)*+4#2)*%7)#*4*%E+'1#+//.'< &22)**%1+%E4##)'1%3'?+#H"1.+' to current research-based information and at the same time ensuring that the knowledge legacy of past investments are Surveypreserved. respondents confirmed this dual demand by indicating that both discoverability (access to current information) and persistence (preservation of digital assets) issues of concern. are librarythe from catalog. linking forpublications extension born-digital to URLs persistent assigned have a review/revision cycle that takes many offline after their pe- however, Extension publications, publica- the transition to workflow a in kinks the out working still We’re passed. has relevance of riod librarythe from access and archive digital to website Extension the on distribution active from tions our website.” on ‘friendly URLs’ use We catalog. !"#"$%&' Published by New Prairie Press, 2017 !"#"$%&' 10 Volume 95, No. 1 • 45 Applied Communications, Journal of Journal of Applied Communications, Vol. 95, Iss. 1 [2011], Art. 4 Art. [2011], Iss. 1 95, Vol. Communications, Applied of Journal

While the cost of implementing the DOI System appears to be an impeding factor to implemen- to factor impeding an be to appears System DOI the implementing of cost the While Inconsistent use of institutional repositories represents a missed opportunity to utilize the ben- espe- Service, Extension the within concerns raise could available permanently resources Making Exten- example, For problems. potential these minimize to developed be could systems However, Extension publishers have many considerations to weigh in the decision-making process of For while example, most publishers are moving toward online digital some content, Extension systems with used be can System DOI The fees. access charging to relates consideration Another Discovery-rich metadata, the DOI System, and institutional repositories are not mutually ex-

tation, using tation, an institutional repository might be a more affordable option with the same benefits for Extension publishers. Investment in an case, institutional this (in repository community university a is involves approach repository typically institutional The made library. through university the librarythe with some assuming library, partneringunits) publishing Extension institution’s the with 2005). & Gibbons, Foster 2002; (Crow, responsibilities management of the digital asset D#)*)#7.'<%6)*+4#2)*%"'(%E+'1#+//.'<%&22)**%1+%E4##)'1%3'?+#H"1.+' efits of repositories to their fullest. For example, when institutional repositories are used only for historical not resources, current the resources, problem of link rot is That perpetuated. is, new re- later then and catalog/website, Extension the in URL a using located initiallybe to fated are sources to links web existing All URL. persistent or handleidentifier a with locationnew a to transferred be manually links unless they are updated. broken thus become would the resource cially regarding sensitive information that regularly changes as research findings and/or regulations printedAlthough preservationfood practices). recommendations, application pesticide (e.g., change Extension materials have been preserved for perennial access in libraries for nearly a the century, repositories could be cause of institutional foropenness and ease of access hesitation. sion publishers could develop a model are initiallywhere Extension resources published in an insti- only access to users for gate a as used is catalog/website Extension the where repositoryand tutional persistent (or identifier handle repository’s institutional the using content, current with resources the Out-of-date in resources the repositoryURL). could be tagged with a date and disclaimer for users catalog/website. Extension the than repositoryrather interfacethe through resources the locate who =1;)#%E+'*.()#"1.+'* or which combination. which one, whether to implement a discoverability technology, form. print physical in only available is content full whose resources of number a have still publishers These publishers may be interested in publishing systems that web. the digitallythrough itself actuallyserving without product it the purchase canto how and product provide information about a The DOI System technically can be used to point specifically to designed metadata are for resources that hand, other are print-onlythe on as repositories, Institutional digitally. exist that those as well repositories generally not used are as without metadata containing indexes to hold digital resources; their associated resources. designed are hand, other the on repositories, institutional Most resources. access to users charge that fees. access that have suited for not well resources and so are to be open access J+',)C2/4*.7.1:%+?%&@@#+"2;)* clusive. The use of standardized, harvestable metadata can be implemented using any approach,

!"#"$%&'

DOI: 10.4148/1051-0834.1175 https://newprairiepress.org/jac/vol95/iss1/4 !"#"$%&' 11 - - Volume 95, No. 1 • 46 Applied Communications, Journal of Anderson-Wilk: Improving Discoverability, Preventing Broken Links: Consideration Links: Broken Preventing Discoverability, Improving Anderson-Wilk:

!"#$%&'()#*+',-./$%.*%01)%234/.*1.'5%/)"()#%.'%670)'*.+'%"'(%672)#.8)'0%90"0.+'%:+883'.;", Extension programs at land-grant institutions have a strong tradition of publishing a great num- great a publishing of tradition strong a have institutions land-grant at programs Extension drawn: are The following conclusions and recommendations R52. (-#)(5*/&#-" ,-5, )!(#4 5." 5#'*),.( 5) 5#-)0 ,#&#.35(5." 5*,)& '5) 5,) ken links. # ,-5(5#(-.#./.#)(&5, *)-#.),# -5)."5*,)0# 5-)&/.#)(-5.".5(5" &*5 R5#!#.&5)$ .5# (.# to discoverability related their concerns and persistence. publishers address Extension R5 -.5' ..5*,.# -5(5 5/- 51#."5 #." ,5." 5 53-. '5),5(5#(-.#./.#)(&5, *)-# tory. R5 )-.52. (-#)(5*/&#-"#(!5)# -5"0 5().5"5!, .5 ()/!"5 '#&#,#.351#."5." 5 I Handle System or institutional repositories to make adoption. informed decisions regarding their 5." 5 53-. '5.)5 5!, . ,5 #.-5) R52. (-#)(5*/&#-" ,-5! ( ,&&35)5().5* , #0 5." 5 ( to implement it. required investment than the financial R5 (-.#./.#)(&5, *)-#.),# -5, 5 #(!5#()(-#-. (.&35/- 5(5/( ,/.# 8 R52. (-#)(5*/&#-" ,-5.5&(7!,(.5/(#0 ,-#.# -51#."5#(-.#./.#)(&5, *)-#.),# -5'35#(5/- 5 of the repository to be a cost-efficient strategy for maintaining stewardship of sources. digital re- Because “Extension publishing” is heterogeneous, a single discoverability strategy cannot fit- &0+41%1;)%&4;1+# 0.+'*%"0%<#)5+'%90"0)%='.>)#*.0?@%A)%1"*%B+#$)(%.'%"%>"#.)0?%+C%2+*.0.+'*%.'%234/.*1.'5%+>)#%01)%/"*0% DE%?)"#*@ E+'2/4*.+'* that assets digital are resources These web. the on materials educational other and publications of ber should be managed both for discoverability and preservation. Scholarlypreserve to publishers respectively, and repositories, institutional Systemand universityDOI the adopted widely have libraries This study examines the applicability digital information basis. and make it an available ongoing on and feasibility of Extension publishers implementing harvestabledigital object metadata standards, and/or institutional identifiers, repository collections to address the common concerns of discover- ability and persistence. how on Each publisher needs to make their decisions tingly apply to all publishing units. Extension their particular published based on needs and conditions. are their digital resources including the DOI System, institutional repositories, and homegrown publishing systems. The DOI The systems. publishing homegrown and repositories, institutional System, DOI the including whatever with conjunction in used be to system a is It platform. publishing full a not is Systemitself mechanism is being used An to institutional publish repositoryresources. can serve as a publishing platform itself or in combination with a Users publisher’s site. can access a repository from the re- catalog or system. index, pository’s engine, a separate search interface or through !"#"$%&' Published by New Prairie Press, 2017 !"#"$%&' 12 Volume 95, No. 1 • 47 EDUCAUSE Applied Communications, Journal of Journal of Applied Communications, Vol. 95, Iss. 1 [2011], Art. 4 Art. [2011], Iss. 1 95, Vol. Communications, Applied of Journal

(5), 76-77. Retrieved May 4, 2009, from http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ from 2009, Retrieved 4, May 76-77. Review(5), 40 ERM0559.pdf http://www.niso.org/standards/re- from 2009, Retrieved4, May Hanover. Sheridan Press, PA: sources/Metadata_Demystified.pdf 2009, Retrieved 4, May 29 Canadian(3). Journal of Communication, repositories. institutional http://www.cjc-online.ca/index.php/journal/article/viewArticle/1455/1579 from from 2009, Retrieved 4, May Libraries. of Research Association DC: Washington, Report 223. http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/315 Re- 787-788. 302(5646), Science, Lost internet references. gone: going, Going, (2003). M. L. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1088234 from 2009, trieved 4, May http://dx.doi. from 2009, Retrieved 4, May 11(1). D-Lib Magazine, repositories. institutional org/10.1045/january2005-foster from 2009, Retrieved 4, May American Distance Education Consortium. NE: Lincoln, mation. http://www.adec.edu/adec-agnic-digital-inf.pdf http://dx.doi.org/10.1087/095315103322110950 from 2009, Retrieved 4, May http://dx.doi. from 2009, Retrieved 4, May 115-123. 6(2), Journal Digital Libraries, tional on org/10.1007/s00799-005-0128-x versity Press. http://chronicle.com/ from 2009, Retrieved 4, May 2002. April 10, icle of Higher Education, free/2002/04/2002041001u.htm http://citeseerx.ist. from 2009, RetrievedAmerican 4, May Society for Information Science. psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.103.5619&rep=rep1&type=pdf access, digital access, asset digital management, in- digital object discoverability, publishing, identifier, http://dx.doi. from 2009, Retrieved 4, May 151-156. 17(2), Learned Publishing, sets. org/10.1087/095315104322958535

Brand, A., Daly, F., & Meyers, B. (2003). Metadata demystified: A guide for publishers. Hanover, Hanover, for A guide publishers. demystified: Metadata (2003). B. & Meyers, F., Daly, A., Brand, of open-access The role Supporting and enhancing scholarship the digital age: in (2004). L. Chan, Bimonthly ARL paper. position A SPARC The case for repositories: institutional (2002). R. Crow, & Schilling, M., Graber, W., J. Kuntzman, L., A. Drake, F., L. Heilig, J., E. Hester, P., R. Dellavalle, recruitment for content faculty Understanding to improve (2005). S. & Gibbons, F., N. Foster, Plan to develop a digital information infrastructure land grant infor- to manage (2007). R. Heatley, 177-181. 16(3), Learned Publishing, Making the link to libraries. OpenURL: (2003). E. Hellman, Interna- A framework for distributed digital object services. (2006). R. Wilensky, & R., Kahn, Columbia Uni- NY: York, New Columbia guide to digital publishing. The (2003). E. W. Kasdorf, Chron- education. in distance ‘link the extent of rot’ measure research Nebraska (2002). V. Kiernan, of the Proceedings Finding documents in a digital repository: DSpace and Eprints. (2005). J. Kim, stitutional repository, metadata repository, stitutional 6)?)#)'2)* Disclosing and sharing as- institutional Programme: FAIR The JISC’s (2004). C. Awre, repositories. in institutional value proposition The (2005). V. & Chachra, E., Blythe, K):8+#(*

!"#"$%&'

DOI: 10.4148/1051-0834.1175 https://newprairiepress.org/jac/vol95/iss1/4 !"#"$%&' 13 Volume 95, No. 1 • 48 Applied Communications, Journal of Anderson-Wilk: Improving Discoverability, Preventing Broken Links: Consideration Links: Broken Preventing Discoverability, Improving Anderson-Wilk:

(6). Retrieved May 4, 2009, from http://dx.doi. from 2009, Retrieved 4, May (6). 10 D-Lib Magazine, internet. the academic org/10.1045/june2004-lossau of Association DC: Washington, 1-7. Bimonthly Report ARL 226 (February 2003), tal age. http://www.arl.org/resources/pubs/br/br226/ from 2009, Retrieved 4, May Libraries. Research br226ir.shtml 2009, Retrieved 4, May 105-108. 11 (2), Technology, Journal of Science Education and hyperlinks. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1014627511641 from http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue52/mckay/ from 52(July 2009, Retrieved 4, adne, May 2007). Retrieved 4,2009, May 221-240. 1(4), WideWeb, World ing and retrieving Internet resources. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1019228117935 from http://www.dlib.org/dlib/november06/organ/11organ.html from 2009, 4, May http://dx.doi.org/10.2481/dsj.4.12 from 2009, trieved 4, May for Media Content Multi-channel Dis- of Cross Production Automated on Conference http://www.doi.org/ from 2009, Retrieved 4, May December 2006. UK, Leeds, tribution, topics/060927AXMEDIS2006DOI.pdf http://dx.doi.org/10.1087/095315106778690760 from 2009, http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/distributed-systems/lo- from 2009, Retrieved 4, May versity of Bath. identifiers/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1087/0953151042321653 from 2009, Retrieved 4, May 299-304. 17(4), from 2009, Retrieved 4, May 125-136. 3.1, and the Academy, Libraries plan. to action concept http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/portal_libraries_and_the_academy/v003/3.1rogers.html of the International Confer- Proceedings A case study. location: resource for metadata direct 2003. September 28, Washington, Seattle, Dublinence on Applications, and Metadata Core http://dcpapers.dublincore.org/ojs/pubs/article/view/743/739 from 2009, Retrieved 4, May http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12109-008-9058-y from 2009, Retrieved 4, May 139-142. 24(2), 2009, Retrieved 4, May 543-549. 2458, Science, Computer Lecture on Notes Laboratories. ard http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/26706from Lossau, N. (2004). Search technology engine Libraries to discover need libraries: and digital (2004). N. Lossau, Essential infrastructure for scholarship in the digi- repositories: Institutional (2003). A. C. Lynch, WWW of educational The ephemeral nature links: Broken 2002. W. D. & Brooks, J., Markwell, Ari- authors. Usability beyond users: ‘other’ repositories and their Institutional (2007). D. McKay, A survey for metadata describ- on (1998). M. C. & Barreto, M., L. M. Campos, C., M. A. Moura, Retrieved 12(11). statistics—what do they tell Download us? D-Lib Magazine, (2006). M. Organ, Re- 12-20. 4, Science Journal, Data data. for scientific identifiers Digital object (2005). N. Paskin, at the 2nd International Presented of digital objects. and meaning Naming (2006). N. Paskin, Retrieved 4, May 250-258. 19, Learned Publishing, at the crossroads. CrossRef (2006). E. Pentz, Uni- UKOLN, UK: Bath, for paper. learning objects—a discussion Identifiers (2003). A. Powell, Learned Publishing, After linking. of reference the goldrush—the age golden (2004). C. Rapple, State bank at Ohio University: knowledge Developing an institutional From (2003). A. S. Rogers, Structured (2003). S. & Katz, J., Keizer, M., Agrimi, G., M. Bovo, J., Weinheimer, G., Salokhe, Publishing Quarterly, Research Discoverability publishing. in book and access (2008). E. Schnittman, repository institutional An the MIT Libraries from DSpace: and Hewlett Pack- (2002). M. Smith, !"#"$%&' Published by New Prairie Press, 2017 !"#"$%&' 14 Volume 95, No. 1 • 49 Applied Communications, Journal of Journal of Applied Communications, Vol. 95, Iss. 1 [2011], Art. 4 Art. [2011], Iss. 1 95, Vol. Communications, Applied of Journal

preserving content for OJS journals. Vancouver, BC: Public Knowledge Project. Retrieved May Project. Public Knowledge BC: Vancouver, preserving for journals. content OJS http://pkp.sfu.ca/files/GettingFoundStayingFound.pdf from 2009, 4, for Digital Librar- Technology Advanced and Research and opportunities. Challenges system: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/11551362_22 from 2009, 4, Retrieved May Springer. Heidelberg: ies. ftp://ftp.fao.org/gi/gil/gilws/aims/publica- from 2009, Retrieved 4, May United Nations. tion, tions/papers/metata_and_search_engines.pdf http://dx.doi.org/10.1087/095315104322958490 from 2009, Retrieved 4, May

Stranack, K. (2006). Getting found, staying found, increasing impact: Enhancing readership and readership Enhancing impact: increasing staying found, found, Getting (2006). K. Stranack, asset management digital The DSpace open source (2005). H. J. Walker, & M., Smith, R., Tansley, and Agriculture Organiza- Italy: Food Rome, Search and metadata. engines (2006). H. L. F. Ward, 115-124. 17(2), Learned Publishing, repositories and scholarly Institutional publishing. M. Ware,

!"#"$%&'

DOI: 10.4148/1051-0834.1175 https://newprairiepress.org/jac/vol95/iss1/4