I am a contract production editor for a small publisher. Part of my role has been to sort out the huge mess the DOIs were in after using a contractor to create and deposit XML, so I have spent a lot of time on various parts of the manual deposit systems and redoing XML manually.
I’ve been using Metadata Manager since it launched for 5 of the 6 journals. This simple form is greatly needed for small companies like this where there is nobody in the company who can work with XML files.
The web deposit form is too fiddly and I found people create errors when using it. Because they need to locate and enter manually far too much information for the journal, we’ve found that nearly every time they get stuck on the journal information page before they manage to get to an actual article. They often created errors here too.
For any non-article content (this is white papers, supplements, poster books), I either do the XML myself or ask the Indian contractor to do it, as we have found the web deposit form generally far too cumbersome.
MM has made a huge difference to the quality and timeliness of the article deposits (~150 articles/year). It means that anyone in the small team is able to deposit or update easily with minimal training.
The key advantages of MM for this client:
• No need to add journal abbreviations, ISSNs etc.
• Can add an article and save metadata before an article publishes, then add the date information and deposit.
• Saved information can be checked pre deposit to ensure it’s correct - this means an editorial assistant can add the article but there is a level of checking which isn’t available in web deposit.
• Clear layout and easy to follow.
• Easy to correct a deposit.
I admit, my heart sunk when I saw the post about closing MM. It has really made a positive difference to my working life.