Two different standards, routinely confused
ISO 15693 and ISO 18000-3 Mode 1 describe the radio: how a 13.56 MHz reader and a tag exchange bits. ISO 28560 describes the meaning: which data elements go on a library tag and how they are laid out. A tag can be perfectly ISO 15693 compliant and still unreadable by your neighbour's system, because the two libraries encoded to different data models. Conformity to the radio standard buys you nothing on its own.
The three parts of ISO 28560
| Part | What it specifies | Consequence for you |
|---|---|---|
| 28560-1 | The catalogue of data elements: the primary item identifier, owner institution, set information, type of usage and so on | Defines the vocabulary. It does not say how the data is written to the tag |
| 28560-2 | Encoding of those elements in the tag's user memory, in a compact binary form | The most widely deployed option in Europe. Efficient, and fixed at encoding time |
| 28560-3 | Encoding based on ISO/IEC 15962, using the tag's object identifier mechanism | More flexible, more verbose. Used in parts of Scandinavia |
| ISO/TS 28560-4 | Technical specification extending the model to UHF tags | Relevant to archive and high-density applications rather than to public lending |
Parts 2 and 3 are alternatives, not a sequence. A collection is encoded to one or the other, and converting between them means rewriting every tag. This is the single decision in an RFID project that is most expensive to reverse, and it is usually made in a five-minute conversation.
The French IDRABIB profile
France has its own national profile, generally referred to as IDRABIB or by the FR01 model identifier, developed to serve French public library practice before the ISO work settled. Large parts of the French installed base are encoded this way.
This matters to any organisation with French collections or French partners. The Lyngsoe staff workstation supports sixteen data models, including ISO 28560-2 and -3, the French model, the Dutch model, 3M, Intellident/UK1 and others. That is what makes a progressive migration feasible: newly processed items are written to the target model while the existing collection keeps working, and the changeover completes at the pace of weeding rather than in one campaign.
What none of them do: encryption
This deserves saying plainly, because vendor literature tends not to. Neither ISO 28560 nor the IDRABIB profile encrypts the data written to the tag. A tag carries an item identifier and, depending on the model, an owner code and some set information. Anyone with a compliant reader within range can read it.
The practical exposure is modest: an item identifier is not personal data, and a borrower's identity is never written to an item tag. But the exposure is real, and it belongs in your data protection assessment rather than in a footnote. Two mitigations are worth knowing about. Keep the data written to the tag minimal, ideally the identifier and nothing more, so that a reading reveals nothing about content. And be aware that the tag UID is a stable, unique number, which makes an item, and by extension a person carrying it, traceable in principle.
We raise this ourselves rather than waiting to be asked, because a supplier who has thought about it is easier to work with than one who has not.
Security: EAS or AFI
Two mechanisms coexist for arming and de-arming an item. The EAS bit is a dedicated flag; the AFI value is an application family identifier that doubles as a security state. Both work. What does not work is a mixed estate where half the collection uses one and half the other, with equipment configured for only one of them.
Settle this before tagging, write it into the specification, and document it somewhere your successor will find it. It is the cheapest decision in the project and the most expensive one to discover late.
Related pages
Accessibility
Published WCAG, Section 508 and EN 301 549 conformance for Lyngsoe Central Management and Sorter Controller,…
Read →How a project runs
The seven stages of a library RFID project, what decides the timeline, and the two steps that are always…
Read →Budget
The cost structure of a library RFID project, why tagging usually exceeds the equipment, and the lines that…
Read →Points worth clearing up
Are HF and UHF interchangeable ?
No. Public library RFID is overwhelmingly HF at 13.56 MHz, with a read range of a few tens of centimetres, which is what makes a stack of books readable on a plate without also reading the next borrower's bag. UHF at 865 to 868 MHz reads much further, which suits archives and warehousing and causes problems at a lending desk.
Can we read another library's tags ?
Physically yes, if the radio standard matches. Usefully, only if you can interpret their data model and their owner coding. This is exactly what the ISIL owner check on a handheld reader is for in a consortium.
Do we have to re-tag if we change supplier ?
Not if the new supplier's equipment reads your existing data model, which is why the number of models supported matters more than it appears to. Have a sample of your actual tags tested before signing anything.
How long does a tag last ?
A passive HF tag has no battery and no moving parts, so it outlasts the item in normal library use. The failure mode in practice is mechanical: a tag that lifts, tears or is removed. Application quality matters more than tag specification.
Tell us about your library
Collection size, annual transactions, the LMS you run and your timescale. Four figures are enough for us to say what is relevant to you, and what is not.