# Presentation: 624618

## Interagency Digital Library for Science & Engineering (IDLSE)Proof of Concept

**Tammy Borkowski**
**Defense Technical Information Center**
**tborkows@dtic.mil**

## Agenda   
Functional Overview
Goals 
Lessons Learned
Next Steps
Technical Overview
Architecture
User Interface
Future Enhancements

**Functional Overview**
**Goals **
**Lessons Learned**
**Next Steps**
**Technical Overview**
**Architecture**
**User Interface**
**Future Enhancements**

## The CENDI Consortium is an interagency working
group composed of senior Scientific and Technical
Information (STI) managers from ten major programs in
nine U.S. Federal Agencies.   

http://www.dtic.mil/cendi

- group composed of senior Scientific and Technical
- Information (STI) managers from ten major programs in
- nine U.S. Federal Agencies.
**http://www.dtic.mil/cendi**

##     CENDI     

**    ****CENDI     **
**    ****GOALS**
** **
** ****Coordination and   **
**       ****Leadership**
** ****Joint Projects**
** ****Information**
**       ****Literacy**

** **

** **

**Commerce**
- National Technical Information Service

**Energy**
- Office of Scientific and Technical
- Information
**Environmental **
**Protection Agency  **

**NASA &**
**National Libraries of**
**Agriculture, Education**
** ****and Medicine**

** **

**Defense**
-  Defense Technical Information Center
-  National Air Intelligence Center

** **

**Interior**
- U.S Geological Survey,
- Biological Resources Division

**Notes:**
- active in the  national STI policy arena - brief key decision makers, provide comments, briefing books and  testimony. Some of the policies of importance to CENDI members include implementation of the Paperwork Reduction Act, OMB Circular A-130, Government Information Locators (GILS) and National Performance Review guidelines.
-also active internationally in efforts to strengthen the U.S. position in STI negotiations and to maximize the use of international information received through exchange programs 
- they support improvements in information technology and its application.  Areas of interest include the development of the National Information Infrastructure; education of information science and technology professionals and training for changing job requirements; developments in the National/Global Information Infrastructure; directions for Internet and WWW development ; and national digital library developments
 - they provide a continuing education forum to keep their members aware of a variety of policies, standards, and technology developments that might impact STI.    
 -sponsor workshops for members; topics include Systems Architecture and Modernization, SGML Workshop ,Helpdesk ,Indexing, Gateway Developers,Bibliographic Standards, Customer Services  

## IDLSE Goals

Improve cooperation as an Enterprise

Elimination of duplicate data  

Improved support for government researchers  

**Improve cooperation as an Enterprise**
**Elimination of duplicate data  **
**Improved support for government researchers  **

**Notes:**
- By this we mean - looking at our similarities and differences and capitalizing on them as an Enterprise.  

- CENDI agencies have been exchanging information all along- from hardcopy or micro fiche;bibliographic records; now bibliographic records and tiff images. Distributed access to these sources is the next step in this evolution.

- By its nature, STI  is interdisciplinary, cutting across many fields and agencies.  The IDLSE promotes a non-agency centric approach to research by including all CENDI sources. 

## Competing Capabilities

Spiders/canned indexes - Not realtime
Duplicating content - Not efficient
WAIS searching - Application dependent
Z39.50 searching - Protocol dependent
Customized APIs - No password capability

**Spiders/canned indexes - Not realtime**
**Duplicating content - Not efficient**
**WAIS searching - Application dependent**
**Z39.50 searching - Protocol dependent**
**Customized APIs - No password capability**

## Value-Added of Broadsword

Password capability
Well defined architecture - fully documented
Security auditing - Air Force certified 
User customization/profiling
Automated admin and security tools
Saved Queries
Batch Queries  

**Password capability**
**Well defined architecture - fully documented**
**Security auditing - Air Force certified **
**User customization/profiling**
**Automated admin and security tools**
**Saved Queries**
**Batch Queries  **

**Notes:**
Unitary login - trusted user and brokered login
  -Brokered login is for source which requires separate login/passwords for each user.  Sys admin configs source to deny all and then adds usernames that can have access.  User then puts in password on preferences page.
  -Trusted user is for source that only requires one login/password for all users.  Sys admin puts in the login/passwd during config of source.
BS has security accreditation from the Air Force
BS user can specify not only which sources (like EF) but also config search form and hitlist, type of search (simultaneous or sequential), and order of search.
BS has help screens and demo videos.  
Auditing of login/logout, query, query response, product request, product transfer, admin/ISSO accesses and functions
BS is GOTS and a lot of work has went into making it portable - installable and configurable.

## IDLSE Participants/Sources

Defense Technical Information Center
Technical Reports Database (www.dtic.mil/stinet/)
Office of Scientific & Technical Information, Department of Energy 
R&D Summaries (www.doe.gov/rnd/dbhome.html)
InfoBridge (www.doe.gov/bridge/home.html)
Department of Education
Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC) (www.ed.gov/databases/ERIC_Digests/index/)
National Air Intelligence Center

**Defense Technical Information Center**
**Technical Reports Database (www.dtic.mil/stinet/)**
**Office of Scientific & Technical Information, Department of Energy **
**R&D Summaries (www.doe.gov/rnd/dbhome.html)**
**InfoBridge (www.doe.gov/bridge/home.html)**
**Department of Education**
**Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC) (www.ed.gov/databases/ERIC_Digests/index/)**
**National Air Intelligence Center**

**Notes:**
NAIC - participating as tester - large researcher group

## IDLSE Status
Updated to version 2.0 of Broadsword software
Customized screens for CENDI 
Separate CENDI GateKeeper  - SPARC 20/Solaris 2.5.1/Apache 12.6 webserver
15 agency test accounts created
All plug-ins are working (DOE Info Bridge, DOE R&D Summaries, Education’s ERIC, and DTIC’s Tech Reports)

**Updated to version 2.0 of Broadsword software**
**Customized screens for CENDI **
**Separate CENDI GateKeeper  - SPARC 20/Solaris 2.5.1/Apache 12.6 webserver**
**15 agency test accounts created**
**All plug-ins are working (DOE Info Bridge, DOE R&D Summaries, Education’s ERIC, and DTIC’s Tech Reports)**

**Notes:**
ERIC-Education Resources Information Center

Will upgrade CENDI Dev GK to Ultra 60 (4 x faster) - 2 360 Mhz processors, 1 Gig RAM, 9 Gig storage, (add 4, 9, 18 as needed)
BS PMO not designed to be production environment.  

## Lessons Learned 

Communication/Collaboration
Interagency Differences    
Technical Issues 

**Communication/Collaboration**
**Interagency Differences    **
**Technical Issues **
** **

## Communication/Collaboration

Get agency buy-in
Effective communication/collaboration within diverse group 
Successfully interpret broad guidance
Who are the users?
What are the relevant sources? 
One voice to represent consortium

**Get agency buy-in**
**Effective communication/collaboration within diverse group **
**Successfully interpret broad guidance**
**Who are the users?**
**What are the relevant sources? **
**One voice to represent consortium**

**Notes:**
- Email, conference calls, video conferencing, periodic meetings
-The group primarily used email to communicate, assigning one person as spokes person for the group, so as not to overwhelm AFRL and to present one voice for CENDI.  
-Video and conference calling working well.  
-Decisions were discussed and consensus was reached.  
-Periodic meetings as needed.

## Interagency Differences
Interface must represent consortium, not individual agencies (e.g. DoD system warning)
Where does interface stop and agency system begin?  (e.g. common shopping cart or individual agency shopping cart)
Consistency of interface for agency sources that present data differently (e.g. Text Box button on hitlist)

**Interface must represent consortium, not individual agencies (e.g. DoD system warning)**
**Where does interface stop and agency system begin?  (e.g. common shopping cart or individual agency shopping cart)**
**Consistency of interface for agency sources that present data differently (e.g. Text Box button on hitlist)**
** **

**Notes:**
The main issue here is how to merge multiple web site/system designs into a coherent whole that represents the consortium not the individual agency.

## Clicking on Text Box

DTIC - goes to the shopping cart screen
DOE InfoBridge - goes to the full record
Education - goes to the abstract which has link to order form
DOE R&D - goes to PDF summary document

**DTIC - goes to the shopping cart screen**
**DOE InfoBridge - goes to the full record**
**Education - goes to the abstract which has link to order form**
**DOE R&D - goes to PDF summary document**

## Technical Issues 

Element mapping across agencies/sources
Need for individual agency test accounts
Learning curve  
What is working versus what is not working
Incompatibility of technologies 
Feed CENDI requirements into User’s Group
How much Help is enough?  (e.g.  date searching is different among agencies)

**Element mapping across agencies/sources**
**Need for individual agency test accounts**
**Learning curve  **
**What is working versus what is not working**
**Incompatibility of technologies **
**Feed CENDI requirements into User’s Group**
**How much Help is enough?  (e.g.  date searching is different among agencies)**
**   **

**Notes:**
- Technical Issues fall into 4 categories: 
        -issues around merging multiple agency sources
        -prototypical BS issues
        -expanded BS issues (i.e. CENDI’s role in the larger development        
              effort of BS within the AF) 
        -generic design issues.
-To begin, we needed to know how each agencies data looked - data element mapping.  Is a title, a title , a title.  Luckily this was already done by the Cataloging Working Group.

- Incompatibility of technologies - 
     SSL - BS emulator 
    Cookies - DOE 
    Firewall - NAIC 
    Plug-in dependency on web interface

## Date Searching
Data range format as specified on search form
Each plug-in interprets format differently
DTIC - exact date range
Education/DOE R&D - start date year
DOE InfoBridge -  start and end date years are used as wild card years and OR’ed together 
Now working for all sources

**Data range format as specified on search form**
**Each plug-in interprets format differently**
**DTIC - exact date range**
**Education/DOE R&D - start date year**
**DOE InfoBridge -  start and end date years are used as wild card years and OR’ed together **
**Now working for all sources**

## Next Steps
Connecting directly to source indexes  
DTIC/DOE  investigate running GateKeeper
In-depth agency testing/prototype refinement
Generation of additional requirements 
Add enhancements
Relevance ranking normalization 
Query expansion
CENDI Planning Meeting in August

**Connecting directly to source indexes  **
**DTIC/DOE  investigate running GateKeeper**
**In-depth agency testing/prototype refinement**
**Generation of additional requirements **
**Add enhancements**
**Relevance ranking normalization **
**Query expansion**
**CENDI Planning Meeting in August**

**Notes:**
-Connecting directly to the source indexes requires modification of the plug-ins, but is a faster, more robust solution.   More robust in the sense that the plug-in is no longer tied to the HTML tags.  Now if web page changes, need to modify the plug-in parsing code. 
-Oracle will be used for the security auditing functions. 
-AFRL currently testing Oracle for auditing (date formatting is different than Sybase)
- Training CDROM available
- AFRL offered to send out a DBA, Sys Admin , and Trainer for one week to assist in the installation
- AFRL would retain development site and CENDI would support production  system
-Perhaps after testing, evaluate list of recommended refinements and at that time make GO/NO GO decision to invest $$ in BS.