Surveys

The last meeting of the BIC/CILIP RFID committee began looking more closely at the ways in which improved communication between existing LMS and RFID systems might be improved by examining the existing methodologies and seeking improvements.

With RFID initially being deployed in support of self-service operations most solutions use 3M’s SIP protocol as the primary data transport mechanism between LMS and RFID systems but for some time now there has been some unhappiness on the part of libraries and RFID suppliers with the protocol’s perceived deficiencies in handling some aspects of the circulation process – in particular in handling financial transactions.

Added to that, the fairly loose device of allowing essentially unregulated “extensions” to SIP to be created by pretty much anyone who wishes has resulted in a protocol that – whilst still essential – is now seen by some to be holding back the pace of development of RFID.

Some LMS providers, especially those relatively new to RFID, and even to self-service, have been reluctant to develop support for what they see as “old” technology. This reluctance has given rise to the creation of new means of handling some RFID based transactions – with web services being prominent among those now being used in conjunction with SIP to provide better financial management for example.

Aware of these developments, but also mindful of the large number of non-RFID installations dependent on SIP (in both self-service and other areas of library operations) the committee felt that now was a good time to review existing options with a view to both regularising existing practices as well as creating a platform of services upon which future systems might be built.

As a first step the meeting agreed to create a smaller working party to examine the existing SIP 2.0 functionality and to create a common set of web services to replace its present base functionality. The plan is to have these services in place by the end of 2010.

Given the nature of SIP – and its extensions – the committee wants to get as much feedback as possible from the market, especially existing users, about their present use of SIP, and any known limitations of which they may already be aware.

3M mentioned at the same meeting that the USA were about to issue a statement about the development of a version 3.0 of SIP. Seen by them as a pragmatic alternative to the rather slowly emerging NCIP protocol for self-service their intention is to revise and revamp SIP to meet the new demands of the market.

The meeting welcomed this announcement – which was confirmed as being imminent by the US office a week later but has yet to appear – and suggested that the definition of SIP 3.0 could just as readily define a web service as another serial-based protocol, i.e. the functionality to be delivered could be the same in either scenario and agreed to keep 3M informed of our work, hopeful that this spirit of co-operation would be reciprocated.

I was asked to provide the focal point for this undertaking and, as a first step, to use all the avenues of communication open to me to garner input from the market. This post appears on both the UK RFID list and my blog – please pass it on to anyone you know who might be willing to contribute.

So what we are seeking from you are details of any extensions to SIP 2.0 that you may be running on your site, together with any known deficiencies of the protocol preventing you from deploying additional functionality.

Just to remind new readers the BIC/CILIP RFID committee currently includes all of the members of the RFID Alliance, many early (and some late) library adopters of RFID, representatives from most of the library materials supply chain, and the library systems market. So it’s about as representative a group as we can construct.

We still need your help though!

Thanks a lot

• Bookmark on Delicious
• Digg this post
• Recommend on Facebook
• share via Reddit
• Share with Stumblers
• Tweet about it
• Subscribe to the comments on this post

Security has caused concern for a number of those replying to this years’ survey of RFID use in UK libraries, with CD and DVD management being singled out by many as causing the greatest difficulty.

The problems do appear to slowly being resolved. In the early days of library RFID greater emphasis seems to have been given to its role in enabling self service than security and the earliest adopters used very small tags that were attached to the centre of the discs – often called “doughnut” or “polo” tags. These worked fine at the issue stations but the aerials on such small tags could readily pass undetected through security gates.

Another difficulty is the “masking” effect that tags have on one another. Unfortunately CD jewel cases are often designed in such a way as to effectively overlay the discs inside very accurately! Since tags in close proximity can block the signals from scanners this prevents some, or often all, of the items from being read – even in the highly focused read field on a self service device.

There have been many responses to the problem from libraries and suppliers alike. Special packaging has helped prevent the “masking effect” but libraries using the small tags found this didn’t solve the security problem.

CD tags have gradually grown in size (now to the full size of the disc), larger book tags added to cases (sometimes hidden), and lockable boxes introduced to deal with the security issues. Libraries have removed discs from self-service altogether. Some have abandoned security altogether, seeing the benefits obtaining from using RFID in other operations as adequate compensation for losses.

The survey results published elsewhere on this blog give some idea of the various means by which libraries have tried to overcome the challenges but the additional comments that many respondents made perhaps offer a better understanding of how well they are being met:

• We use EM tags for CD/DVDs.
• Some “reference only” materials are EM security only because of the cost of tags, hence dual security gates.
• We don’t use RFID yet on A/V material.
• We check each safer before relocking to ensure all discs are present.
• All CD’s had to be re boxed. CD’s and DVD’s had RFID labels and red bar locking tags. Borrowers de-tag the items themselves after issuing at self service.
• We use “Red Tag” DVD and CD cases.
• Tags are added to CD/DVD cover sheets.
• “Safers” are tagged with book tags.
• Pre-recorded DVDs are kept behind the counter.
• CD/DVDs are stored out of cases. This was an inherited solution that we did not have the investment to change and was not a priority.
• CDs: just polo tags. DVDs: case plus one DVD
• On multiple packages we use one book tag on the case, and tag only one disc using the ’set’ option.
• Mixture of many approaches – none are ideal.
• We have a mix of open access and security cased CD/DVDs.  Security cased items are issued by staff.
• We leave CDs in cases. The DVDs are removed from the cases. Customers issue the cases then come to staff for the discs.
• Using combined security release/desensitising mechanism
• Discs are kept completely separately from the cases – NOT Self Service
• Only DVD holding branches live so far and in these, DVDs are kept at the counter with just the boxes on display.
• We operate a “collect at counter” system for AV. We felt it was not worth the investment in other security methods as income raised from AV is diminishing and ROI would not be achieved.
• We attempted to implement CD/DVDs as self service, but in a number of instances the discs were being thrown around outside. Trading standards got involved and discs are now stored behind the counter and issued as before.
• We are trialling this and if losses are too great will look to use “safers”.
• No capacity yet for kiosk to handle money, so if DVD is taken to a self-service terminal, it gives a message to ask customer to take it to counter. Will review once Cash Management module enabled on LMS (on order).
• We have tagged our DVDs, however the tags do not work therefore the items are on closed access.
• We have EM security on discs, but do not yet have an RFID solution.
• Customers issue/ pay for their items at the kiosk and then staff unlock the security case at the staff desk.
• Customers collect DVDs from staffed points following issue. This ensures that we check age restrictions are being adhered to. We haven’t found an electronic solution that can do this
• We tag the DVD box only.
• Cases are tagged and sealed – still reviewing this!
• “Safer” cases relatively easy to open – items get stolen regularly.  Tags too big and easy to remove
• We tag the locked cases to ensure the alarm goes off if they are not issued properly
• RFID security used in Main Library Short Loan
• We are prioritising maximum student access over security – and will be very interested in the answers you get to these questions.
• We do not tag off-air recordings on DVD. In the past we had an archive of them on a hard drive and it is cheaper to run off a new copy than tag them all. We now rely on Box of Broadcasts instead. Some purchased items are kept behind the issue desk, some are in keeper cases.
• We tried the tag directly on the DVD but found they could not be read correctly and gave up!
• Frankly this is a mess.  It has proved unreliable and we’ve changed what we do.
• We have tagged DVD cases with book tags as very small AV stock at this site
• Where multiple disks are in a case we either split the case into multiple items or only tag the case
• CDs and DVDs are currently in cabinets at Lending Services and users have to ask for them.  This will change when our refurbishment programme is complete
• Normal book tags on the covers. However at Central library they are not available for self issue because the CD’s and DVD’s are kept separate from the boxes.

• Bookmark on Delicious
• Digg this post
• Recommend on Facebook
• share via Reddit
• Share with Stumblers
• Tweet about it
• Subscribe to the comments on this post

I recently sent each of the responders to the 2010 UK Library RFID usage survey a summary of how each of their suppliers had been rated by other users of the same system. Many asked if they could see the overall figures for comparative purposes and so here they are!

The format will be familiar to those who have already receieved their own reports but if anyone has any difficulties in interpreting the results (just a small part of the whole survey) please let me know. The full survey is being published by degrees elsewhere on this site. 

• Bookmark on Delicious
• Digg this post
• Recommend on Facebook
• share via Reddit
• Share with Stumblers
• Tweet about it
• Subscribe to the comments on this post

The first results from this year’s RFID usage survey are finally ready and may be downloaded here together with a list of the questions that were asked.. Analysing the data was rather more complex a task than anticipated. 259 replies were received, of which 244 proved to be genuine and relevant to the UK. 6 were removed as they were from US based suppliers (presumably trying to see what we’re doing over here), the rest were just jumbled letters and numbers from those who I assume wanted to see what questions were being asked. Three companies complained about the validity of the survey.

The remaining 244 replies represented 192 different organisations and removing the duplicated data – without removing any of the opinions – proved to be a long and painstaking process. The results give a snapshot of the market as at January 2010 but there are a couple of caveats that should be taken into account when reading them.

First and most obvious is the fact that the survey is not comprehensive. Suppliers will complain that they have more sites than the survey shows (they are already!) but I can only report what information was supplied. On that point it is perhaps worth mentioning that I have had to double count most of the D Tech and Bibliotheca data as there seems to be some confusion among clients as to which company is currently supplying them.

A second point that should be borne in mind is that I have had to decide between several replies from the same organisation which contain the accurate information regarding, for example, present and projected levels of use. In those cases I have used data supplied by those describing themselves as “Managers”, “Implementers” or “Advisers” rather than “Users”.

In matters of opinion – e.g.  “Who provides the most help?” – I have included all the responses.

These first results only summarise the raw data. There is still more to do – particularly in determining how many different solutions to CD and DVD management are out there. That will require some cross tabulation of the answers to establish what each library has done. There are over 40 added comments in this section – clearly the most complex and confusing area of RFID adoption!

More reports as I complete them. All the data will be published on my blog as well as the list. I will draw any conclusions (and invite you to draw yours) on the blog.

A huge “thank-you” to everyone who completed the survey.

• Bookmark on Delicious
• Digg this post
• Recommend on Facebook
• share via Reddit
• Share with Stumblers
• Tweet about it
• Subscribe to the comments on this post

Earlier this year I ran a quick survey on the UK RFID list to try and discover which topics were of the most concern to subscribers. CILIP had asked me to prepare an agenda for their annual conference and asking people what they wanted to know about seemed a pretty straightforward way of finding out. Judging by reactions to the conference, that approach seemed to work quite well.

So emboldened by that outcome I yesterdaylaunched a slightly more detailed survey to try and gain a picture of how the technology is being used in UK libraries. Over the last year I have frequently  been asked by organisations if I have any data about the number of installations, reliability of equipment, attitudes among RFID users etc.  and this is my attemot to provide some answers. The results will be made available to list subscribers early in the new year.

If you would like to join in please follow this link:

Survey now closed – sorry!

Three dedicated profesionals had already replied to the list posting  – made at 8pm on a Sunday evening – within 3 hours of its appearance, demonstratingthat there is  perhaps some real enthusiasm for it. I have even had suggestions that the same survey might usefully be run for other countries but I’m not sure whether that’s a good idea or not?

Any suggestions (preferably helpful) gratefully received.

• Bookmark on Delicious
• Digg this post
• Recommend on Facebook
• share via Reddit
• Share with Stumblers
• Tweet about it
• Subscribe to the comments on this post