We have a number of member presses with the ability to send files and metadata to LOC’s CIP program. Most of them are using it to apply specifically for e-book registration, not print.

LOC are getting both book files (PDF) and metadata (ONIX), so pre-publication/galley PDFs would be needed if someone wanted to use this to apply for print…[Read more]

In the full ONIX 3 specification, “$0.00” is not a price that should ever exist. Either a non-zero <Price> block or an <UnpricedItemType> tag should be used.

Ideally, someone properly parsing ONIX should either disallow a price of “$0.00” or, more realistically, treat it differently.

For example:
You can make a book “free” via sending…[Read more]

Though I suspect Trond overstates my capability, I appreciate the confidence.

He brings up a point that’s clearer in the slide stack than in what I posted: using multiple eISBNs.

As the slides point out, there are a few ways you might use multiple eISBNs in general.

Your system might allow you to create an “OA” eISBN versus a “free” eISBN (in…[Read more]

I’ll upload the slides from my presentation at AUPresses this year if I can, but the gist of it is that BiblioVault classifies 4 types of vendors in their “OA-ness”:

OA “Only” – hopefully self explanatory, these vendors take ONIX 3, with UnpricedItemType with value “01” for free/no-charge, EpubLicense, and other OA specific tags. OAPEN,…[Read more]

EBSCO was having trouble getting them from their Excel sheets (they do both Excel and ONIX), so we added them to our ONIX 2.1 and ONIX 3 output. It seems to have helped the EBSCO situation. No idea if any other vendors are using the data, but we send it. SubjectSchemeIdentifier “04”

As an aside, the English teacher in me wants to say that the “abridged” adjective is in the wrong place. This is the second iteration of the abridged edition, so my instinct is that you to call it the “2nd abridged edition” because it comes after the “(implied: 1st) abridged edition”.

This has nothing to do, of course, with traditional naming…[Read more]

The presence of the <AlternativeName> block within <Contributor> blocks in ONIX 3 and the use of ORCIDs or ISNIs are meant to deal with the situation, but the question exists of whether they are used/accepted by the database you’re using or the vendors you’re sending to. It may be that you can’t do AlternativeName, but you can have their old name…[Read more]

BiblioVault’s ONIX 3 output can send chapter data (including abstracts and keywords if stored), but currently only Project MUSE and DeGruyter are getting them. (I don’t think MUSE has indicated to us that they’re ignoring the data. It would be odd, since they helped us debug the output.) Since we are an “aggregator” of the metadata, we collect the…[Read more]