|
RFID in libraries. Q&A -------------------------------------------- |
|
Identifier: http://biblstandard.dk/rfid/docs/RFID-in-libraries-q-and-a/index.htm Hosted by Royal Danish Library |
Minor revision of the document July 2023:
Some not more relevant information deleted.
Remark that information about ISO 28560-4 not included.
General RFID
What
is RFID?
Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) is a
set of technologies that enables tracking and monitoring activities to be
carried out using RFID transponders (often called tags) and invisible radio
waves without a line of sight. The read
range generally increases with an increase in the frequency used,
Commonly, the technology is employed to
track items such as pallets or cartons within a supply chain or warehouse. RFID is also used to identify animals, hospital patients, shipping
containers, laundry garments, airline baggage and so on. RFID for libraries is one of the most widely
implemented applications.
Why
RFID in libraries?
RFID systems have been in existence within
libraries for many years. Various suppliers claim to have installed the first
RFID library system but it s generally accepted that somewhere in the mid
1990 s, RFID appeared in a library somewhere in the world. During the last 10
years, usage has accelerated but penetration remains relatively low compared to
the total number of libraries. However,
the total number of libraries using RFID is significantly greater than in many
other sectors, resulting in the fact that the library sector is well beyond the
phase of innovators and is certainly well into the phase of early adopters.
RFID s property of non line-of-sight
operation can be very useful within a library. If the barcode traditionally
used to identify library material is replaced with an RFID tag, the library is
immediately able to process multiple items simultaneously and the tag can be
located inside the cover in the case of printed material. No longer does every
item require individual handling. The resultant benefits to libraries may be
seen in the following areas:
Staff productivity
Customer service
Reduced materials handling for staff
New and improved collection management
processes
Faster and more-intuitive self service
options
What
sort of RFID technology is used in libraries?
The first challenge for a developer of
library RFID systems is the size and the cost of the tag. Libraries essentially
need a smart-label application that can be attached to library material in a
relatively unobtrusive way - a passive tag of some sort without a battery. The
tag needs to be flexible and durable. In the item security context, the tag
needs to be readable over a distance of at least half a metre. Libraries would
also like to be able to read tags in a stack of books very quickly so that the
productivity of library staff may be improved and the self-service experience
of library users may be enhanced.
The RFID reader technology is built into
several equipment pieces specifically for library use. These include:
Staff workstations for issue and returns
Self service issues equipment designed for
the library users
Security gates for theft detection
Portable devices for inventory and collection
management activities
Smart returns chutes or bins
Materials handling and sorting systems
RFID Technology & Frequency Issues
Why
the debate over frequency for RFID in libraries?
The debate about frequency could not have taken place at the time that
the first libraries started to implement RFID systems. Then the only universally acceptable
frequency that met operational requirements was 13.56 MHz. In fact there was a mixture of standardised
and proprietary technology at that time.
Low Frequency is not really a contender because of the short read range.
The other contenders are UHF (860 to 960 MHz), and even RFID protocols at
higher frequencies, particularly 2.45 GHz, which seem to have failed to gain a
significant market. So let's consider UHF.
The first UHF air interface protocol standard was published in ISO/IEC
18000-6:2004 and this covered two types of tag. It was not until ISO/IEC
18000-6:2004/Amd 1:2006 that the standard was extended to cover Type C
tags. These are equivalent to the EPCglobal Class 1 Generation 2 tag specification, around
which a lot of exaggerated forecasts were made.
For example as ISO 28560 moves forward to publication, the forecasts
were that there would be trillions of Type C tags in use. Actually there are possibly
more library tags in use as we write than the total production of Type C tags.
So hyperbole about this RFID technology, the EPCglobal
system itself, and the prediction that tags would cost 5 cents has raised
interest in the Type C tag.
What is often not considered are the different characteristics of UHF
technology and the architecture of the Type C memory.
These include:
Significantly increased read range not always appropriate
Different behaviour when the tag is surrounded by organic material: books
and people
A partitioned memory, with many tags still only providing 96 bits for a
unique identifier and no other memory
Tags compliant with ISO/IEC 18000-6:2004/Amd 1:2006 provide no selective
locking, even if more memory is provided
On the positive side:
Faster reading of the RFID tag
A greater number of tags can be read 'simultaneously'
Greater immunity to the tag-masking or
tag-shadowing problem affecting RFID tags in close proximity
UHF might have a role in future
library systems. The working group does acknowledge the
interest shown in UHF technology by libraries and also understands that the
technology is rapidly evolving. Any decision to support UHF has to be taken
after a proper evaluation of the technology and compare it with other options
available at the time for example a new HF technology.
Why
has the ISO working group limited its scope to High Frequency systems?
The purpose of the new ISO standardised data
model is to increase the interoperability between RFID systems provided by a
range of suppliers. Unfortunately at this stage, there is no interoperability
between UHF based systems and systems built around HF technology. This lack of
interoperability goes well beyond the data model and involves issues of
fundamental technology. Also, the reality today is that the overwhelming
majority of currently installed RFID systems around the world are based on HF
platforms, particularly ISO/IEC 18000-3 Mode 1.
Why
do the ISO 28560 standards use 13.56 MHz as frequency? Have libraries chosen the wrong technology?
The decision by the vast majority of libraries before the development and
publication of ISO 28560 was to support HF technology. This covered some proprietary and some
standardised technology. So it is not just an issue of frequency but of
specifying a particular air interface protocol.
As there has been an increasing focus on using
ISO/IEC 18000-3 Mode 1 tags, so the development of ISO 28560 could not ignore
this position. ISO 28560 now provides
the standardised platform for increased interoperability to enable existing
RFID implementations in libraries to migrate to a standardised solution and for
new implementations to adopt the standard.
The 13.56MHz frequency does offer a number of features that have
obviously been considered suitable for RFID for libraries and operating
successfully for a number of years. So
HF cannot be defined as the "wrong" technology. If, in future, a case is made for considering
either a different HF air interface protocol or adopting a different frequency,
then the standards will need to be reviewed accordingly.
When
a book is sorted out of the library do we need to remove the tag or
deactivate it?
The simple answer is "NO", both on the basis of the technology
and based on custom and practice. The 18000-3 Mode 1 has no features that
enable a tag to be rendered temporarily unreadable.
There has been discussion about the potential benefits of using chipless tag technology, what are the implications of this?
There have been many proposed
developments of a chipless tag, which are part of a
wider trend of printed electronics.
There is no doubt that the millions of (whatever currency you like to
name) that have been invested in R & D in this area will eventually result
in a technology worth considering.
As a press story (August
2011) about a university development cited the chipless
tag as the solution for libraries we won't mention the university here - we
need to consider the facts at the time of writing:
There are fundamentally different technologies being researched
to produce the chipless tag.
The technology is still laboratory based, in terms of replacing
conventional RFID.
The technology is generally proprietary, and protected by
patents, which can be a serious impediment to standardisation of the
technology.
By its nature much of the technology is read-only,
or encodable only once.
The tag "promoted" as a solution for libraries has a
24-bit structure. To comply with AFI
requirements of ISO 28560, this leaves 16 bits for identifying a loan item, or
65535 different items if the existing human readable identifiers are abandoned.
But if all the code points are used, then there is no
robustness in the system. As a reference
the ISBN-
For a REAL WORLD application like library circulation it is
essential to ensure that there is sufficient robustness in the code
structure. It is not evident yet with chipless tags.
If any library wants to take
the risk of using a 24-bit code with no capability of re-writing data, not use
standards, not have any robustness in the technology to deal with communication
noise, then the solution recently being proposed for libraries is right. On the
other hand, if libraries want to progress step-by-step to more sophistication
and potentially lower costs with RFID technology, then stick with the
standardised rules for RFID at the technology level in ISO/IEC JTC1 SC31 and at
the library application level with ISO TC46.
Eventually, when chipless technology becomes viable, libraries also need to
avoid the trap of jumping into a proprietary technology solution which locks
them out of interoperability. Almost every sometimes good proprietary bar
code symbology and RFID technology has fallen by the
wayside. Eventually users realise that being locked in with one source of
supply is not a good thing.
RFID Standards
I thought there already was an ISO standard for RFID tags, so what does
this new ISO 28560 family of standards change or add?
There are
numerous RFID technology standards covering the air interface protocol, the tag
architecture, and even the data encoding rules.
The new ISO 28560 family of standards adds a completely different
dimension. Part 1 defines the data
elements, effectively the data dictionary that is used for the application for
RFID in libraries. Parts 2 and 3 define
different encoding schemes, but both focus specifically on one air interface
protocol operating at 13.56MHz (see next answer).
Why
do the ISO 28560 standards use the 13.56 MHz frequency?
ISO 28560 Part 2 and Part 3
both specify the same 13.56MHz air interface protocol which is ISO/IEC 18000-3
Mode 1 (which, in turn, is based on ISO/IEC 15693). This is by far the most common technology
currently being used in RFID for libraries.
On this basis it made complete sense to provide a migration path from
proprietary and national models to an international standard based on the vast
majority of existing RFID library implementations.
My collection contains many RFID tags that are not ISO/IEC 18000-3 Mode 1
compliant. Can this standard be used on those tags?
There are features in ISO
28560 Part 2 and Part 3 that rely upon the use of ISO/IEC 18000-3 Mode 1
compliant tags.
If your library uses ISO/IEC 15693 tags these use the same air interface
protocol as 18000-3 Mode 1, but it might be relevant to check that the tag
supports the commands that are essential for RFID for libraries. For example
commands to read and write data are actually
optional in the 15693 standard.
If your library uses another
High Frequency (13.56 MHz) tag, and your RFID system provider intends to
support ISO 28560 encoded in 18000-3 mode 1 tags, then there will be methods to
distinguish between the types of tag.
This vendor-specific method can be used to manage the transition to the
new International Standard, but it is more likely that ISO 28560 encoding rules
might only be possible with the 18000-3 Mode 1 tags. Your supplier can provide more advice.
If your library is using a
different RF frequency, then interoperability with ISO 28560 will be a
significant challenge.
I
have been hearing about UHF RFID. What about the EPCglobal
standards?
UHF and HF (13.56 MHz)
technologies are different and not interoperable, so do not provide a
cost-effective migration for any library that has already implemented RFID.
Like HF there are different UHF standards and it is not clear which is certain
to be the dominant technology in the future. Most experts consider that ISO/IEC
18000-6 Type C (also known as EPCglobal Class 1 Gen2)
will dominate, but for libraries this might still not be the best solution.
Memory is organised in a different way (see answer to Can ISO 28560 be applied
to UHF? ) which presents additional challenges. Then to add additional
complexity, EPCglobal has also sponsored the
development of a new 13.56 MHz standard with the memory structure similar to
its UHF tag. The EPCglobal
HF standard has yet to be published, but very similar functionality is now
provided by the new ISO/IEC 18000-3 Mode 3 technology. Finally, it is not clear
which of these tag technologies the book trade will adopt, and when such an
adoption might take place. As there are many uncertainties, ISO 28560 is firmly
focussed on 13.56 MHz technology.
Will these standards address tag quality and longevity concerns?
The simple answer is
"NO". References are made to a
conformance standard for the air interface (ISO/IEC TR 18047-3) and a standard that specifies
a method for testing tag performance (ISO/IEC 18046-3). This performance standard defines how to test
for some performance parameters, but does set any pass / fail values.
What
is the life-time of a RFID tag? Will the content disappear in a few years?
The technology standards do
not specify an expected life-time.
However, the manufacturers of the integrated circuits (the chips) and
manufacturers of the RFID tags, which include the antenna, make claims that
tags can typically have 10,000 read/write cycles. There have been claims for 100,000 cycles
even 1 million - and a life span of up to 40 years. Anyone purchasing RFID tags needs to check
with their vendors on the specific claims being made.
Does
the use of RFID pose any health problems?
The use of RFID is governed
by strict regulations on the power that may be emitted at the given
frequency. This is the power is emitted
by the reader and the tags themselves have no power source and only function in
proximity of a reader. The regulations vary between regions and countries
around the world, but for 13.56MHz technology they are considered to be
comparable and safe.
In some regions, a
distinction is made between the safety levels that apply to staff and members
of the public. The exposure to staff
using RFID is normally set at higher limits, because the expectation is that
safety regulations will be covered in staff training. For members of the public, the extent of
exposure has to be lower because the health conditions to the individual is
unknown and their knowledge of RFID is considered to be lower. Safe use by
staff of RFID and design of RFID self-service systems should mitigate any
risks.
Will
the price for RFID tags fall in the future?
There are two factors that
can contribute to a reduction in the price of a tag, and two factors that might
keep prices at the same level or even higher.
The price of tags for 18000-3 Mode 1 could come down if market forces
prevail. Currently, RFID for libraries
presents the largest single marketplace for RFID, but libraries are not
necessarily exercising their purchasing power as the largest customer base for
the tags. Another point that can
contribute to a price reduction, is that the
particular type of tag being specified in ISO 28560 has been available for some
time. This means that research and
development costs should have been recovered and price can move to a
cost-of-production basis. This is quite
complex to achieve, because the RFID integrated circuit manufacturers are also
spending R&D resources on new tag technology. If the customer base fails to exercise its
opportunities with respect to supply and demand, then there is no incentive for
manufacturers to reduce the price.
Prices might increase because of the increased price of commodities that
are used to make the RFID tags. Finally,
a word of caution: the standards specify basic rules but manufacturers make
products to a specification. So it is
important to ensure that tags are of a sufficient quality for use in the
application.
Can ISO 28560 be applied to UHF?
The data elements, specified
in ISO 28560 Part 1, are generally independent of any RFID technology issues
including data encoding. Whatever decision is made to support any different tag
technology even a different 13.56 MHz air interface protocol, a significant
review would need to be undertaken. To introduce UHF technology as a migration
from either ISO 28560 Part 2 and / or Part 3 will most likely require
additional parts to be added to the ISO 28560 family.
Adoption & migration
Do I need to migrate to this standard?
There is no requirement to
migrate to ISO 28560, and its two different encoding rules. However, a number of vendors have undertaken
development to support the standards and there is an increasing interest in
achieving interoperability. The choice
still remains with each library.
How can I be sure not to violate privacy?
This is a complex area, and
subject to national and even regional law (for example across the European
Union). Generally such law applies to
all of RFID.
The key point to note, at the
time of writing, is that there are many different RFID library systems in
operation and not being challenged by the relevant authorities. There are a
number of misunderstandings about privacy and RFID, both from the lobbyist
community concerned about privacy and from the vendor community. The issue is not simply about RFID
technology, but the entire RFID system. There are additional considerations in
the entire library system that is subjected to other legal requirements such as
data protection. Earlier this year, the
European Commission circulated a consultation document and the European library
community responded to this. As
developments take place, this website will provide updated information.
As technology changes, how can we be assured that all systems with be
backward compatible?
There is no guarantee that
all systems will be backward compatible with any future changes. On a more positive note, the standards have
been written in a way that provides the same potential for moving forward with
changes in technology, as have been supported for the migration from
proprietary and national models to ISO 28560.
The most fundamental change in technology will be the introduction of a
new air interface protocol. When the library community, through their national
standards bodies, express that a new technology needs to be considered, ISO
TC46 SG4 WG11 RFID for Libraries will give the matter serious consideration and
widespread consultation.
There will also be ongoing
technology changes associated with the particular air interface protocol. If these are standardised, then they will be
considered but libraries need to be aware that if vendors introduce proprietary
features, these might be detrimental to interoperability for inter-library loan
purposes, and even interoperability of devices.
ISO 28560 Standards Issues
I see that ISO 28560 has 3 component parts. What are the differences
between the parts? Why are there 3 parts?
The three parts meet
different requirements:
Part 1: Data
elements and general guidelines for implementation defines
the data elements and will be relevant irrespective of how the data is encoded
on the tag and even which tag technology is used. It will be revised as new data elements are
agreed to be added to the standard.
Part 2: Encoding of
RFID data elements based on rules from ISO/IEC 15962 makes
use of generic RFID encoding rules that provide the flexibility just to encode
the one mandatory data element or to select any of the optional data
elements. It is possible to selectively
lock any data element.
Part 3: Fixed
length encoding provides for a migration from some of the
existing national fixed length encoding schemes, particularly the Danish
model. There are a number of mandatory
data elements in the basic 'encoding' block. The standard is silent about
locking, but generally this needs to be applied to an entire block.
If there are 2 compliant data models, do the vendors' products need to
support both to be compliant with the standard?
Conformance requirements for
ISO 28560 Part 2 and Part 3 are different.
This has been covered by the conformance documents published on the
website:
http://biblstandard.dk/rfid / "Conformance Guidelines ISO 28560. RFID in Libraries".
These documents make it clear that conformance between the two standards
is independent. It is possible to claim
conformance to just part of the process, for example, for encoding the tag but
not necessarily for decoding the tag and vice versa. The intention is to provide different types
of vendors with the greatest amount of flexibility to support the library
community with interoperable devices. A
top class company that only manufactures printer encoders will be able to
consider claiming conformance.
Major vendors of complete library RFID systems, when assessing the market
will most likely support both standards.
Is an RFID system strictly tied
up to one of the two encoding specified in ISO 28560, or will it be able to
handle tags independent of the chosen encoding?
If a vendor decides to
support both encoding schemes, then various "software switches" can
be used to automatically process individual tags encoded to one or other
scheme. An alternative approach is for a
vendor to primarily support one encoding scheme, but use the same type of
software switches to divert to the data from tags based on the other encoding
scheme to a parallel set of software.
What is AFI?
AFI stands for Application Family Identifier. ISO/IEC 15961 (and later revisions still in
development by ISO) use the AFI as a tag selection
mechanism across the air interface. This
means that if a library book is taken into a different environment where a
different AFI has been assigned for that application; there will be no system
clash with the library loan item being confused with the other application
system. The same applies in reverse with
a tag coming from another environment into a library. It is for this reason that an application for
a specific AFI was made early on in the process, so that existing proprietary
and national models could adopt the correct AFI as early as possible.
Which
values of AFI do we need to use?
ISO 28560-1 clarifies that one or two AFIs may be used, depending on how
the security system works in a particular library.
A
library shall at least use a single AFI, the value C2HEX assigned
under the registration of ISO/IEC 15961-2. This distinguishes library items
from all others, and avoids the risk of an RFID reader in another domain
reading the RFID tag on a loan item and confusing its encoded content with data
in an application outside the library domain.
The AFI may
additionally be used as part of an item security system where the AFI value
C2HEX is written to tags for items that are on loan to a client.
When the books are returned, the in-stock AFI value 07HEX is written
to the tag.
What do I need to consider about character sets?
ISO 28560 Part 1 specifies the data element and constraints on some of
the characters that can be used for encoding that data element. These rules are carried through into the
encoding of Part 2 and Part 3, but with some subtle differences (see the
details below).
What
is an ISIL?
ISIL is an acronym for International Standard Identifier for Libraries
and Related Organizations The rules are defined in ISO 15511 Information and
documentation - International Standard Identifier for Libraries and Related
Organizations (ISIL). The rules define a
method for identifying libraries, archives and museums. The data elements: Owner institution (ISIL)
and ILL borrowing institution (ISIL) use ISIL to identify the library. The ISIL
may take one of two forms:
a) using a country code prefix to identify a
national ISIL agency
b) using a different prefix to identify a
non-national agency, for example OCLC has registered the WorldCat Symbol
More information: http://biblstandard.dk/isil/
What
if the ISIL is a WorldCat Symbol is OCLC needed
as prefix?
The answer is no. On http://biblstandard.dk/isil/ is stated, that Code O
(letter) for OCLC can be used as prefix for technical encoding of WorldCat Symbol in e.g. RFID tags.
What
is an ISIL don t fulfill the ISO 15511 ISIL requirement to characters?
There are situations where a WorldCat Symbol
assigned by OCLC contains characters that are not permitted by ISO 15511, and
therefore cannot be encoded in a manner that conforms to ISO 28560 for data
element 3 Owner institution (ISIL) and data element 11
ILL borrowing institution (ILL). For an
owner library affected by having such an WorldCat Symbol, these options are available:
Approach OCLC to request an alternative WorldCat
Symbol that fully complies with ISO 15511.
o NOTE:
It is understood that future assignments of OCLC codes will comply with ISO
15511.
Approach the national ISIL allocation agency (see http://biblstandard.dk/isil/) to have
an alternative ISIL, which can be encoded in data element 3 Owner institution
(ISIL).
Use data element 23 Alternative owner institution, and encode the WorldCat Symbol here.
Use data element 23 Alternative owner institution and prefix the WorldCat Symbol with the two characters "O=" to
signal that it is an WorldCat Symbol (not to be mix
up with O- as prefix and separator in data element 3).
For a lending library in ILL transactions, WorldCat
Symbols that do not comply with ISO 15511 shall be encode in data element 25
Alternative ILL borrowing institution and not in data element 11 ILL borrowing
institution (ILL). This is because the lending institution has no control of
the ISIL of the borrowing institute.
Should
I consider locking the data? What should I be thinking about when I decide
which way to go on this issue?
The ISO/IEC 18000-3 Mode 1 tag has a facility to selectively lock blocks
of data. A block is a fixed number of
bytes for a particular tag model and typically is either 4 bytes or sometimes 8
bytes long. Once a block is locked, it
can never be unlocked. So this is the
first point for a library to consider. A
further challenge is that, based on the encoding rules, a library might not
know which data elements can be locked or not.
Locking capabilities for Part 2 and 3 are discussed below.
Do we
need to encrypt some of the data on the tag and how?
None of the data elements are specified as requiring encryption. This is
because the 18000-3 Mode 1 tag provides no method to store an encryption key in
a separate memory area. In addition,
although encryption without such a separate memory is theoretically possible,
the keys will either need to be encoded with other data or need to be exchanged
between stakeholders, particularly for interlibrary loans. If a data element is considered sensitive in
a particular domain, then it should not be encoded on the tag.
I
have heard that I might need to "refresh" the data in my RFID tags
periodically, is this so?
Various technical experts have been consulted on this point, and there is
a slight disagreement in their views. One view is that refreshing is necessary
because there is a gradual reduction in power capabilities as time goes
by. Other experts say that it does not
matter, and the very action of reading and writing tags actually achieves an
element of "refreshing". There
are a number of RFID discussion platforms that raise various issues about RFID
in libraries, and this does not seem to have been a significant issue in the
discussions whereas many other topics have.
Will
the new standard address item security?
Part 1has a complete annex devoted to security, effectively anti-theft,
issues and covers three main types of security mechanism:
Using a dual AFI, where the security
implementation is based on an AFI code with the value 07HEX programmed as the
AFI code for library items that are checked into the collection. It also
requires that AFI code C2HEX is encoded on items that are checked out and on
loan.
Using the tag's unique chip identifier and
a database compiled with the tag IDs of items that are checked out of the
library. The security system is programmed to read all tag ids, look them up in
the database and, if they are not in the database of authorised checked-out
items, the assumption is that they have been removed in an unauthorised manner. The database only needs to hold tag ids that
have recently been checked out.
Using electronic article surveillance
(EAS) features have been added by some manufacturers of ISO/IEC 18000-3 Mode 1
tags as a proprietary feature. As such, the operation of this feature is outside
the scope of the ISO/IEC 18000-3 Mode 1. It is included here because a number
of vendors offer this as a feature of their system. Interoperability between
different EAS systems cannot be assumed.
How
are new elements added to ISO 28560?
Five of the data elements are Reserved for future use . The ISO working
group (ISO TC46/SC4/WG11) has decided a procedure for assigning these elements
for specific use. If you identify the
need for a new data element, contact your the national member body of ISO. This
body can send a proposal for use of a reserved element to the Convener of ISO
TC46/SC4/WG11 RFID in libraries.
A proposal shall include name of the element and its definition for
including in ISO 28560-1 and a description of intended use and reasons for use
on international level. In addition
there need to be proposed encoding rules for ISO 28560-2 and ISO 28560-3. Then
the editors of ISO 28560 will submit the proposed additions to WG11. If a
proposal passes a vote in WG11, the proposal will be published at
http://biblstandard.dk/rfid/. It will also be a formal proposal to be added to
ISO 28560 when the next update of the standard are carried out, especially as
it has previous acceptance within WG11
This procedure ensures that a general need for a new element can be
fulfilled in short time.
ISO 28560-2 Specific Issues
How
can I migrate to the ISO 28560-2 standard? Will I need to re-tag my collection?
There are two main migration paths to ISO 28560-2. In the short term, the more likely path is from
a proprietary coding scheme to the standard. The data encoding is completely
different and libraries need to consider whether a national or other data model
is in place for ISO 28560-2. The other
path is from an existing national data model, where again the encoding is
complete different.
Encoding to 28560-2 requires the appropriate AFI and DSFID to be encoded.
This enables tags compliant with the ISO standard to be distinguished from
previous encoding schemes. A specific
consideration is that tags that were previously locked might not be able to be
converted. In this case it might be necessary to re-tag the particular loan
item. Generally if none of the previous
data has been locked, then re-tagging is less likely.
Do I
need to use all data elements, and if not, do I need to make a profile? No. The only mandatory data element is the Primary Item Identifier. However, consideration needs to be given to
the possibility of national or regional data profiles being in place. Links to
national profiles are listed here. http://biblstandard.dk/rfid/docs/RFID-in-libraries-Links-external/index.htm
What
do I need to consider about character sets? The encoding for Part 2 has ISO/IEC 8859-1 as the default character
set. There are also special rules for
encoding some data elements. There are four data elements (title and the three
locally defined data elements in ISO 28560 that may be encoded to support
languages other than the Latin alphabet.
In this case UTF-8 is required to encode these data elements, then this
needs to be explicitly indicated in the encoding process. Does
it matter in what order the data elements are encoded on the tag? Part 2 only requires that the primary item identifier is encoded in the
first position, but recommends that the content parameter is encoded in the
second position (but even this is not mandatory). Part2 then allows complete flexibility for
the selection and order of the data elements.
This is possible because of the flexibility offered by the ISO/IEC 15962
encoding rules. What
should I consider about locking the data? Part 2 addresses
locking by enabling a library to choose which individual data elements are to
be locked and then leaving the encoding process to deal with the technical
organisation so that blocks are locked on the tag. Three data elements should never be
locked. These are the ones that are
associated with any inter-loan library transaction: ILL borrowing institution (ISIL), ISO 28560-3 Specific Issues How
can I migrate to the ISO 28560-3 standard? Will I need to re-tag my collection? There are two main migration paths to ISO 28560-3. In the short term, the more likely path is
from a national coding scheme, for example the Danish model, to the
International standard. The basic block of ISO 28560-3 is the same as the
Danish model. Other pre-existing national models might be different. ISO 28560-3 has additional block for the
encoding that the library might decide to encode. The other path is from a proprietary encoding
scheme, where the encoding is complete different from 28560-3. Encoding to 28560-3 requires the appropriate AFI and DSFID to be encoded.
This enables tags compliant with the ISO standard to be distinguished from
previous encoding schemes. A specific
consideration is that tags that were previously locked might not be able to be
converted. In this case it might be necessary to re-tag the particular loan
item. Generally if none of the previous
data has been locked, then re-tagging is less likely. Do I
need to use all data elements. And if not, do I need
to make a profile? The data elements in the basic block are the core data elements for
inventory control and circulation. The other blocks contain data elements for
acquisition, ILL, title and library supplement. You can pick the data elements
you need. If you use more than the basic block, it is recommended to define a
profile (See Annex E and section http://biblstandard.dk/rfid/docs/RFID-in-libraries-Links-external/index.htm
What
do I need to consider about character sets? The default character set for strings of data for Part 3 is UTF-8. In addition, specific encoding rules are
applied to some data elements. Does
it matter in what order the data elements are encoded on the tag? Part 3 first puts the data elements into sets (known as blocks not to
be confused with the block structure of the memory on the RFID tag itself) and
then, within each block, specifies the sequence of the data elements. The basic block is mandatory, and has a
defined set of data elements. Part 3
also specifies a number optional of structured extension blocks, each with a
defined structure, but with the capability of not encoding some of the data
elements defined for the block. What
should I consider about locking the data? Part 3 does
not prescribe any strategy for locking.
Such a strategy is left for regional profiling. It should be noted that the structure of the basic block means that no
individual data element may be locked and only the entire block may be
locked. How
does the validation check work? When an RFID tag is written, a checksum is calculated and stored as part
of basic block. When a tag is read, the same calculation is done. If the
checksum calculated by the reader differs from the stored checksum, an error
has occurred, and the tag should be inspected. The reason may be an error on
the tag, e.g. wrong encoding scheme, or an error in the reader. The validation
method is CRC Cyclic redundancy check (See Annex C).