SOPAG Meeting, October 25, 2002, Action Minutes

See also http://libraries.universityofcalifornia.edu/sopag/

Present: A. Bunting, B. Hurley, J. Kochi, P. Mirsky (recorder), M. Moody, J. Ober, L.Tanji, J. Tanno (Chair), S. Wittenbach
Absent: T. Dearie, K. McGirr, B. Miller

1.1. Melvyl Transition:

1.1.1 UC Affiliated Libraries: J.Ober distributed a draft document regarding principles for review of new or changed record sources from affiliated libraries. CDL is seeking guidance regarding contacts with affiliated libraries. SOPAG recommended that for organizational reasons, contact with the affiliated libraries should be mediated by the general library.

ACTION: J. Ober will revise the document and redistribute to SOPAG

1.1.2 Non-UC Serials: SOPAG discussed the various options proposed for providing access to the non-UC serials previously available via CALLS but which will no longer be available after the switch to the new Melvyl catalog. Most of the feedback indicated that Option 3 of the background discussion document, which will provide access to sources via a broadcast tool such as MetaLib or Searchlight, was the favored approach. Initial analysis of the available technology suggests it will be possible to create campus specific searching (campuses can identify from which collections to retrieve). It also will be possible to put some high level links in Melvyl to direct users to important other academic catalogs (such as CSU, the Getty, etc) as well.

ACTION: SOPAG supported option 3 with the understanding that there needs to be greater visibility for certain collections
              .
1.1.3 Update Frequency for Input Streams to Melvyl: J. Ober presented a recommendation from the Melvyl Transition Team that the minimum frequency for the updating of records in Melvyl be at quarterly intervals. This will affect few of the contributors. In addition, a process for reviewing sources that fail to meet this standard was proposed.

ACTION:  SOPAG endorsed the recommendation.

1.1.4 Preferences for @ Campus Locations: J. Ober indicated that he was in receipt of the preferences from each of the campuses regarding the inclusion or exclusion of an RLF in the retrieval for campus specific use of the @ Campus command. The parameters for the @ Campus location retrievals will be set as requested.

1.2 SFX Co-Investment: J. Ober indicated that the SFX license agreement is now in UCLA purchasing. The purchase will probably be completed in November and technically could be up in 1st quarter next year. A proposal for the sharing of the ongoing maintenance costs for the license agreement was distributed. SOPAG agreed that the costs would be shared 8 ways, as Davis has already purchased its own license for SFX.

1.3 UC-eLinks/SFX Update: The UC eLinks/SFX server has been adjusted to better screen for incomplete metadata in incoming UCeLinks (via OpenURLs) and, as a result, requests that cannot be automatically handled are now being routed to campus ILL blank forms.

1.4 Request/Desktop Delivery: Consortial Borrowing Software—Fretwell Downing is installing software to deal with the problem created by the campus having only one OCLC location but several ILL operations.

1.5 CMI Update: ULs will receive a comprehensive update on CMI, including plans for user survey. The survey will be contacting 20,000 potential respondents with a goal of generating 7500 responses across several user categories. Fourth quarter data will be out shortly. Campuses have been informed that they are free to make arrangements to return experimentally withdrawn titles to the campus or leave them in storage.

1.6 e-Scholarship Update: Scholarship liaisons have been appointed by each of the campuses.  500 University of California Press books are now available in digital form. These are the books formerly in netLibrary. An additional 1000 books will be added over the next six months. These are full-featured, XML-encoded versions. The records for these titles will be made available via the Shared Cataloging Program.

1.7 Digital Preservation-Update: The IMLS grant supporting establishment of a UC digital preservation repository has been awarded. A program director position is nearly ready for active recruitment.

1.8 Resource Liaisons: SOPAG asked for clarification of the process by which Resource Liaisons are identified. SOPAG confirmed that CDL should work through CDC as the lead group to respond to calls for RLs and to vet the nominations. SOPAG and other relevant groups (usually bibliographer groups) should be copied on the call.

SOPAG discussed the importance of meeting ACG chairs on a regular basis. The issue of improved communication between the ACGs and SOPAG was discussed, including the need for greater clarification of the role of the SOPAG liaison to the groups.

ACTION: J. Tanno to inform ACG Chairs that we would like to invite them to meet with us after January. The goals and objectives for each group will serve as the framework for the joint discussions.

ACTION: J.Tanno to inform LTAG Chair that Bernie Hurley will be serving as SOPAG liaison to its group.

ACTION: J. Tanno to inform SOPAG webmaster to add names of SOPAG liaisons into the membership listings for each ACG and to confirm that the SOPAG liaisons are on the mailing lists for the respective groups.

2.1 RSC - Goals and Objectives: The Resource Sharing Committee submitted its Goals and Objectives to SOPAG for review and endorsement.

ACTION: SOPAG approved the RSC Goals and Objectives

2.1.1 Circulation Advisory Group Blocking Proposal: (deferred until next SOPAG meeting)

2.2 LPL – (Library Privacy Liaisons): The group has not yet met.

2.3 HOTS - Update

2.3.1 Brief Record Standard: SOPAG is awaiting feedback regarding clarification of language in the document.

2.3.2 Single vs. multi record standard: SOPAG is awaiting feedback from HOTS regarding the application of the standard not only to SCP records but also non-SCP records.

2.4. Heads of Public services (HOPS)

2.4.1. Common Interest Group on Information Literacy Charge:

ACTION: J. Tanno to inform HOPS that the charge for the Information Literacy Group was approved.

2.5 LTAG: LTAG submitted to SOPAG guidelines re retention of library system records.

ACTION: J. Tanno to thank LTAG for their rapid work and inform them that the recommendations should be forwarded to the Library Privacy Liaisons Group for their consideration as they embark on their tasks.

3.1. Task Force on Government Documents: The TF met on October 11th .

3.2. Task Force on Digital Visual Resources Planning: The Task Force is in the process of surveying the campus libraries about the collections they have with a focus on still/single images.

SOPAG members reviewed the various discussions that had taken place on the campuses. All the campuses had not yet completed the discussion process. SOPAG identified a possible process for continuing systemwide discussions. It was suggested that a workshop focusing on the public services perspective of AIM would follow the campus discussions. This would then be followed up with  a UC Digital Library Forum, which would address the implementation challenges.

ACTION: SOPAG members will forward written feedback on the AIM to A. Bunting, who will collate the responses. AIM topic will be placed on the agenda for the November 20th teleconference meeting as a precursor to discussions anticipated at the Joint UL/SOPAG meeting in December.

No action except as noted in 2.0 above.

SOPAG began a wide ranging discussion on the issues surrounding the management of print collections in a digital age. SOPAG is aware of continuing discussion among the University Libraries about the concept of a shared/sharable print archive. Of immediate urgency, however, is the need to address the concern that some print materials may be inadvertently lost to the University of California as campuses make individual decisions about what to retain and what to cancel in the face of severe budget constraints. The CDC, at its October 10th meeting, began to tackle that issue by developing recommendations for managing a shared print archive for the journal titles represented in our license agreements with Elsevier and ACM. These two publishers were viewed as only the first to be addressed.

The recommendations are as follows:

CDC is therefore recommending to SOPAG that the following plan be initiated to establish this shared print archive:

• That we begin with journals that are presently available at no additional cost with the systemwide electronic license (e.g., Elsevier, ACM.) Our expectation is that order and receipt of print counterparts to digital content will broaden to other licenses under CDC's guidance.

 
• That the print copies (928 Elsevier titles) are used to initiate the creation of a “University of California Libraries” collection, with the moniker UCL.

 
• That ownership of the content would be collective; all campuses could count the UCL holdings as their own.

 
• That the appropriate location for the archive is at a RLF, and for the present it is recommended that the UCL would be physically housed at SRLF.

 
• That initially the one print set would be retained, and that the journal issues remain unbound for both access and preservation reasons.

 
• That the print holdings would be considered a hybrid of an open access archive and a  “Dim Archive" in the following ways: articles can be faxed, photo-copied and desk-top delivered; print issues will not be Inter-Library Loaned outside of UC;  issues would be retrieved only if a UC user needs to consult the print artifact in an “in-library” RLF setting.

 
• That a trusted UC processing infrastructure would be required, and that it would not be appropriate to outsource this responsibility.

 
• That the records for the holdings would be given in Melvyl as UCL, and that consultation with HOTS would be required to resolve issues pertaining to record elements, content, and processing guidelines.

ACTION: SOPAG endorsed the recommendations of CDC. Chair Tanno will communicate this endorsement to CDC and direct CDC to create a small working group, with membership from CDC, HOTS and the RLFs, to address the processing issues. CDC should also continue to refine the model proposed. CDC, or its working group, should not concern itself with the issue of “counting” at this time. In addition, SOPAG would like to confirm and encourage communication among bibliographers regarding cancellations.

SOPAG also had a preliminary discussion of the draft report of the Scholarly Information Task Force, a sub group of SLASIAC, and how it might participate in the continuing development of the report. This document responds to the TF’s charge to advise SLASIAC on new strategic directions for planning, by defining and articulating a structure consisting of a vision, goals and strategies for post-Partnership policy and resource development for management of scholarly information, including libraries.

ACTION: Chair Tanno will communicate the SOPAG comments to Dan Greenstein. SOPAG proposed that the discussion continue at the joint meeting with the ULs in December.
A. Bunting will inform the ULs of SOPAG’s desire and determine if the agenda in December will permit time for such a discussion.

J. Ober presented the report of the planning committee on the UC Digital Library Forum held in August. Attendees found the sessions very useful and recommended that the UC DLF’s be continued. LTAG volunteered to serve as the ongoing planning group for the DLF’s.

ACTION: Chair Tanno to charge LTAG with the appointment of a small program committee, whose membership should include J. Ober and at least one digital library developer from the campuses. The program committee should develop a formal proposal to SOPAG using the “Guidelines for Submitting Workshop Proposals” see http://libraries.universityofcalifornia.edu/sopag/SOPAGworkshopguidelines.htm
SOPAG felt that a session once a year is sufficient, unless the agenda drives more, attendance justifies and funding permits.

ACTION: Chair Tanno to acknowledge receipt of report from planning group for the UC Digital Library Forum and communicate that SOPAG accepted its recommendations and that the group was now disbanded.

Feedback from Charlotte Brown, Chair of University of California Archivists Council (UCAC) indicated that she will be following SOPAG’s recommendation to attempt to influence the deliberations of the Records Administrators Group (on which UCAC has a representative) with regard to electronic records management policies and procedures.