COUNTER Code of Practice: Release 5

Thank you for taking the time to provide feedback on the draft Code of Practice! Your feedback will be used to adjust the draft before the Code of Practice is released in its final version. 

This survey covers the changes from Release 4 to Release 5 and the new COUNTER Reports and Metric Types. Consultation regarding detailed formatting issues and technical implementation will be taken through other surveys.

Before completing this survey, you may wish to study the questions and consult with colleagues. A PDF of the survey questions may be downloaded from here.
The Draft Code of Practice, which you may want to reference as you complete the survey, may be downloaded from here.

The FAQ for Release 5 can be downloaded from here.

Please answer this survey by by close of business on 18th April.

* 2. What is your initial reaction to the draft of Release 5?

* 3. Do you agree with the following statement?  Release 5 is an improvement over Release 4.

* 4. Please rate the effect of the following standard report changes from Release 4 to Release 5.

  I do not understand the change Negative No opinion Positive
Fewer standard reports due to flexible reporting
Introduction of summary and expanded reports
Elimination of mobile standard reports
Elimination of consortium standard reports

* 5. Release 5 defines four types of searches:  searches_regular, searches_automated, searches_federated, and searches_platform.  Do you agree with this approach?

* 6. Release 5 defines six types of requests related to accessing content:  total_investigations, unique_item_investigations, unique_title_investigations, total_requests, unique_item_requests, and unique_title_requests.  Do you agree with this approach?

* 7. Release 5 defines two types of access denied:  no_license and user_limit_exceeded.  Do you agree with this approach?

* 8. Release 5 defines five access types:  Controlled, OA_Gold_APC, OA_Gold_Non-APC, OA_Delayed, and Other_Free-to-read.  Do you agree with this approach?

* 9. Release 5 defines two access methods:  Regular and TDM (standing for Text and Data Mining).  Do you agree with this approach?

* 10. Release 5 defines whether an item is in a separately licensed archive/backfile by using the Is_Archive metric, which has Yes and No attributes.   Do you agree with this approach?

* 11. Release 5 includes the Year of Publication for content used. Do you agree with this approach?

* 12. Do you have a need for article/item level reporting?

* 13. For content providers, such as publishers and vendors, there are Provider Discovery reports. Please provide any comments about these reports.

* 14. Overall, what do you like most about Release 5?

* 15. What changes would most improve Release 5?

* 16. What do you find most confusing about Release 5?

* 17. Please provide any other comments here:

* 18. Thank you for your time and feedback!

Please leave your contact details if you would like to be kept informed of the consultation process.

T