Attended by: Chuck Eckman (chair), Gail Ford (recorder), Rebecca Green, Jim Gordon, Norma Kobzina, Mary Ann Mahoney, Scott Miller, Barclay Ogden, Margaret Phillips, John Roberts, Teresa Salazar, Kathryn Wayne, Susan Xue. Absent: Gary Peete, Linda Vida
Guests: Ivy Anderson, CDL; Suzanne Calpestri, Kathleen Gallagher, Lee Leighton; Brian Quigley, Jesse Silva, Beth Weil
Agenda
1. Announcements
2. Reports on Library of Congress meeting on cataloging of series; D2D meeting; RLG-OCLC migration issues – Lee Leighton
3. Early Bird Follow-up – Ivy Anderson, CDL Collections
Action items
Meeting Content
1. Announcements
• The Head of Acquisitions Librarian: description approved; ready to call search committee and list
• The Head of Serials Cataloging: description going forward for approval
• Collections new public website: Chuck is scheduled to meet with WAG next week to discuss where the entry link will appear on the public web.
2. Reports on recent Technical Services conferences (Lee Leighton)
• Library of Congress: LC changed their practices for cataloging series almost a year ago. Many libraries have expressed concerns. LC is hosting three meetings, across the country, to get input. One of these meetings took place recently in Mountain View. Interested parties who presented included faculty, representative library organizations, Google, Microsoft. Bernie Hurley made a presentation. New ideas are surfacing about how discovery tools might be redesigned. Participants expressed desire to maintain some form of name control; to find a simpler database structure than the Marc record; showcased new tools such as Indecca (software that offers related items a searcher might want – based on call number proximity and/or subject heading similarity.
• D2D (Discover to Deliver)
This conference was sponsored by RLG-OCLC to get input on what functionality/ features an improved search tool would include. Roy Tenant was the keynote speaker, offering facts and predictions:
o 84% of searches are now done via a web search, while only 1% are done via a library portal.
o Soon, the tool most often used to do a search will be cell phones.
When all RLG records are merged into OCLC, many thousands of new records will have been added, making OCLC the largest bibliographic database in the world. It therefore provides a unique resource for doing comprehensive retrievals. Some newer features that are emerging could be integrated into a new search tool, including relevance ranking based on number of links to a site + number of hits on the site; authentication allowing users access to the information for which they are eligible; location information about holdings within x miles of the searcher.
• RLG-OCLC migration issues
Berkeley’s will do an upcoming “reclamation project.” Berkeley will be realigning GLADIS/Pathfinder records to OCLC records via OCLC’s reclamation project. This should ensure that any records that appear in GLADIS and not in OCLC will be uploaded, and that records that have been removed from GLADIS (e.g., withdrawn) will be removed from OCLC as well. This project is scheduled to occur before the end of 2007.
Master records in OCLC will be linked to individual catalog records should these be different. Cataloging via RLIN 21 will not be supported beyond July/August 2007.
Many units use OCLC: reference, cataloging, ILL, etc. It will be interesting to see how each service changes as the structure of the database changes.
Early Bird Follow-up – Ivy Anderson, CDL Collections
Conversation surfaced these points
• it’s not clear to selectors how prospective shared print collections like the Canadian Literature Project differ much from the existing, perhaps more informal agreements for ILL/last copy. Ivy suggested that this program might foster confidence that low-use items acquired would be persistent, with specific behaviors. Chuck suggested that a potential benefit of this sort of project would be expanding the breadth of collections across the entire system, while reducing unnecessary duplication.
• e-Book vendors are calling CDL, showing great interest in developing consortial models for licensing. Chuck expressed concern that -- unlike e-journals for which Portico, LOCKSS and CLOCKSS are in place – there is no digital preservation strategy for e-books. Ivy agreed saying that CDL is going slow, waiting to see what evolves with regard to ILL and archiving. In the latter regard, Ivy mentioned a .pdf/a format that would foster perhaps, easier preservation of digital book-length material.
• Ivy mentioned that CDL does not expect to get some of the really fantastic deals they were able to negotiate in the past when budgets were being cut (e.g. 0% inflation guaranteed over several years.) She commented that they are trying to limit increases in new contracts to no more than 5%, and preferably less. She also mentioned that CDL, historically a co-contributor for portions of new titles, hopes to be able to continue doing this, although some of their ability to do so may erode as additional demands are made on collection funds in areas such as mass digitization and shared print.
• Ivy spoke about SERU, a new initiative to draft a statement of best practices for publishers of e-journals and libraries alike. By signing onto such a statement, the SERU group is hoping that libraries could dispense with the need to do lengthy and complicated 2-party negotiations. This may be feasible because, even without a license, providing and using e-material already exists inside the legal surround of copyright and contract law. Ivy counseled that we should test this first with smaller publishers, not with the very large publishers where the financial stakes are high. Care must be taken to ensure that perpetual rights aren’t compromised by reliance on SERU. It should not be considered a vehicle for every transaction.
• She also mentioned that the systemwide plans for choosing which functional areas to implement first in an electronic resource management system (ERMS) may need to be refined. Further conversation is likely between CDL and campuses about what libraries would like from such a system.
Continuing Agenda Items
• Collections Access Projects
• Desiderata List
• Preservation of and access to web-based content
• Gifts in kind (continued)
• RLF persistence policy – lost and damaged items (continued)
• Liaisons as fund-raisers – workshops (s) by Development
Upcoming Events
• 3rd e-books presentation: EBL (being rescheduled)
Working subgroups
• Demand Driven Selection Task Force
• Collections Integrity Task Force
• JUR Trial
• Subgroup to advise on desiderata list
• Subgroup to advise on Collections public website
• Subgroup to advise on annual collections budget request
• Collections Data Management Task Force (to be charged)
Standing Advisory groups
• Budget Advisory Group
• Digital Acquisitions Group
• Scholarly Communication Advisory Group
• E-Books Advisory Group
Go to Collections Council minutes
Copyright © 2008 The Regents of the University of California.
All rights reserved.
Server manager contact