SOPAG Meeting, 2/26/99, Action Minutes

Present: P. Mirsky, Chair, C. Clark, B. French, M. Heath, C. Johns, L. Kennedy (LAUC), B. Schottlaender, J. Tanno,
J. Wilson,  A. Ritch (recorder).

A. CDL related items.

A1) Update on Request.

French distributed a draft "Summary of Patron Initiated Request Service Phase II 1999-2000," which outlined the next steps for the project with a preliminary timeline.  French identified the SOPAG meetings which would be the most likely decision points: 4/9/99 - discussion of policy issues regarding the delivery of articles in Phase II; 6/4/99 - assessment of data from Phase I. French speculated that full implementation of article request, with maximum automation, would most likely coincide with Phase II, January 2000.

Loan period policy continues to present difficulties.  Many faculty have requested more than the current standard of 3 months; some have argued for a full year; 6 months may be a reasonable compromise. Currently, the standard faculty loan period AT all the campuses except SF is one year.  Whether request privileges should (or technically could) be blocked for borrowers who fail to return material also remains an open question.  Although such problematic policy issues could be resolved independently of Phase II implementation, SOPAG agreed that policy and technical changes be made at the same time

* ACTION:  HURLEY will analyse the new French draft in relation to the original PIR plan to ensure that everything is covered.
* ACTION:  FRENCH and MIRSKY will clarify process and calendar.
* ACTION:  FRENCH will mount the draft description of Phase II and its policy issues on the Web to stimulate comment from other interested groups.

Wilson expressed concern about the problem of load levelling, in the light of complaints from one or two campuses about receiving too many  requests in a given day.  SOPAG agreed that there need be no explicit limit, that the current system worked reasonably fairly and that it could be improved only with considerable technical difficulty.  If CDL Request follows the OHIOLINK model, such workload costs may be mitigated by shifting responsibility from ILL to circulation units.

Hurley pointed out an anomaly in UCB's inability to use Request to borrow UCB-owned materials from NRLF, because of current coding confusion between ownership and location.

* ACTION: HEATH  will attempt to resolve this anomaly.

A2)  Plans for  the CDL forums.

French reported that the content of the CDL Forums (3/24 Oakland; 3/31 Irvine) is continuing to be adjusted to the tight schedule. The section on "open access" content will be attended by all participants.  In view of the large size of the gathering and the complexity of such issues as: how best to collaborate to avoid redundant effort; the value and role of existing campus developments (such as INFOMINE); and the desirability and nature of future editorial control, SOPAG agreed that each campus should select a spokesperson on this topic.  The section on shared collections will become one of the afternoon breakout sessions.  SOPAG endorsed the proposed model of multiple simultaneous sessions.

The forums are expected both to inform and to gather advice, and so they require a large, organizationally diverse attendance. Hurley and Schottlaender both argued that allocating 15 places per campus unfairly disadvantaged the larger campuses.  Ritch and Wilson agreed to report back within a week whether UCSC and UCSF need all their places.  UCB would like 30 places and UCLA 25. If these numbers cannot be accommodated in the March sessions, Hurley suggested repeat sessions, within a month or two.

*ACTION: FRENCH will ask CDL's John Ober, organizer of the forums, to see whether the facilities will allow the ceiling on attendance to be raised and to set a firm deadline for reporting the names of attending.

A3) Developing an OAC Content Thematic Taxonomy.

Schottlaender distributed two versions of a "thematic taxonomy" of content for the Online Archive of California.  The first, based on a preliminary scheme by Ritch drawn from the JSC survey results, had been distributed to the UC OAC list in late January, with a short period for suggestions of content to populate the proposed hierarchy.  Based on the responses, the taxonomy had been expanded, with a wider and deeper hierarchy to accommodate a broad range of candidates, some 600 archival collections, measuring 10,000 linear feet, which fit the overarching concept of "California Sourcebook."  The next challenge will be to identify and fund practicable projects.  The OAC approach initially will favor sampling of collection parts, in order to illustrate the largest possible number of collections and to serve the broadest possible audience, as opposed to the complete conversion of large collections to serve the needs of relatively few scholars.

Mirsky indicated that UCSD's contribution had been inhibited by concern about property rights.  Schottlaender had encouraged respondents not to worry about this issue, since OAC wanted to identify UC's most valuable content, to test the extent to which selective digitization conformed to fair use laws, and to discover collections which might serve as useful test cases.  Ritch requested examples of boiler-plate language which might be used to allow donors unambiguously to permit digitization of their gifts.

Schottlaender reported that Jackie Dooley (UCI) would be leading a best practices workshop to promulgate desirable standards for conversion, and that he would be working with CDL's Architecture and Standards Group to ensure a smooth integration of these collections into the CDL framework.

Clark reported on the progress of the Task Force on Electronic Resources Cataloging (TFER2) in developing draft cataloging guidelines (now available for review and comment on the Web) and in preparing a draft survey for the UC Heads of Cataloging on campus preferences.  SOPAG endorsed the proposed poll and recommended that it also be sent to members of HOTS and LTAG.

*ACTION:  CLARK will ask Pat French (UCD) and Lynne Hayman (UCSB) to distribute the poll immediately, and to present its results to SOPAG at its 4/9 meeting.  Laine Farley (CDL) and Rebecca Doherty (CDL) will also be invited to attend

SOPAG recommended that the alternative displays which would result from various cataloging recommendations be exposed to the comment of public service staff.  Johns observed that many public service people at Santa Barbara prefered the separate record as opposed to the single record approach which is the favored national standard.  SOPAG reiterated our need for a strong report advocating a unified approach by the proposed UC central cataloging agency (CCA).  SOPAG agreed that the costs of variant practices be transfered to the campus which insisted on them.

Mirsky led a discussion of the draft charge to the "Task Force on Collection Management Strategies in the Digital Environment" distributed 1/29/99.  There was general agreement that the title was misleading and needed to be made more descriptively precise, for example, "Task Force on Collaborative Strategies for Archiving Print."  French identified some of the most important issues, among them the reliability of technology and access and the readiness of users to accept digital access and fewer print copies.  Hurley and Johns anticipated resistance to the loss of printed resources, especially by faculty in the Humanities, but agreed that the conversation had to begin.  Several members observed that the dollar and space savings would likely be minimal for the forseeable future and should not be used to justify budget reductions or delays in needed building improvements.  Ritch and Kennedy urged that the implications of shared ownership of items deposited at the regional facilities be throughly explored, so that the campuses which discarded their copies would not be disadvantaged.

Several other wording changes in the draft charge were recommended.

*ACTION: SCHOTTLAENDER will redraft the charge and redistribute it to SOPAG within a week.

After the charge has been redistributed:

*ACTION: SOPAG members will, by 3/31, send nominations for Task Force membership to Richard Lucier.

French asked for advice on the related issue of what to do with CD-ROMs and tapes, offered by some providers as permanent archival copies.  One efficient solution was supported: UCB would place its copy in the NRLF; UCLA would place its copy in SRLF; other campuses could discard theirs; catalog records should indicate the RLF copies are archival copies. SOPAG recommended that this issue not be added to the above charge but be put on the agenda of the 4/29 joint meeting of the ULs and SOPAG.

French and Ritch reported on progress by the Joint Steering Committee on Shared Collections (JSC) in developing a list of about 8-10 commercial resources which had recommended by several groups in response to the Fall 1998 survey, and which fit JSC selection criteria.  French reported that negotiations for PCI, LION and HARPWEEK had been recently consummated and these resources would soon be available to all UC users.

Karen Cargille (UCSD) in her role as CDL's acquisitions agent is assembling a list of crucial licensing terms and issues to be mounted on the web as a tool for UC people negotiating for digital resources.

French asked for clarification on campus acceptance of the Elsevier offer as the two-year-long negotatiation nears its conclusion.  The following had indicated support: UCB; UCLA; UCSF; UCSB; and UCSC. Of the other campuses, most were likely supporters; UCR remained the least certain about sustainable funding.

Mirsky provided an update on Tricor and net lender issues.  Due to some billing confusion some invoices were sent to the campuses, but CDL has agreed to pay Tricor for 1999 costs.  Campuses will begin to pay these costs in 2000.  The ULs plan to use 1997-98 data on ILL activity as the net lending benchmark for distributing future costs. However, the spreadsheets still need clarification, since the labels are misleading and the data are inconsistent.

Mirsky reported on the response from Gary Lawrence (UCOP) on SOPAG's request for systemwide web site for its documents with appropriate links to documents of its committees and groups.  Lawrence's written response, shared after the meeting, agreed to the following points. CDL staff are willing to set up a generic server account for SOPAG, but SOPAG needs to designate its own Webmaster(s) who would be able to post HTML pages and other files within the directory authorized by the account.  SOPAG would be entirely responsible for the editorial content.  Lawrence would provide a link from the Systemwide Library Planning (SLP) web site to the SOPAG "home page." He invited SOPAG members to review the SLP homepage as context <www_slp_ucop_edu.html>; <planning.html> at the next layer down is the current link page to other planning groups; <planning2.html> is a proposed revision which would incorporate the link to the SOPAG page; <UL Advisory Groups.htm> is a preliminary mockup of the SOPAG page, the appearance and content of which would be under SOPAG control.

Mirsky led SOPAG through a review of the draft charges for three groups: the Heads of Special Collections; the UC "Resource Sharing Committee" (currently known as HOPS ILL Subcommittee); and the Heads of Circulation.

SOPAG endorsed the Heads of Special Collections (HOSC) as a Common Interest Group with a separate purpose and function from those of the UC Archivists Council.  SOPAG, rather than CDC, will provide general oversight, since Special Collections also involves service and other roles.

*ACTION:  SOPAG MEMBERS will review the draft text more closely and send comments to MIRSKY who will then convey them to Jackie Dooley (UCI), Chair of HOSC.

SOPAG will discuss the draft charge of the UC Archivists Council at its next meeting.

SOPAG endorsed the renamed Resource Sharing Committee (RSC) as a Common Interest Group, but questioned the proposed membership in view of the implications of the new broader title.  The group will be expected be closely involved in the progress of CDL Request development.  Wilson saw the coordination of statistics gathering, in consultation with SLP as an especially important responsibility.

*ACTION:  SOPAG MEMBERS will ask their ULs to review the campus representation in the light of the "Resource Sharing" title and broader charge.

SOPAG reviewed the draft charge of the Heads of Circulation in the light of the proposed role for RSC.  Until the latter is resolved, during a period when the separate roles of, e.g., circulation and ILL, are shifting, SOPAG was unwilling to endorse the Heads of Circulation as a formal group.  There was general acknowledgment that in its current informal state the group had served a valuable purpose, especially in information sharing and training.

*ACTION: MIRSKY will work with Charlotte Rubens (UCB), Chair of RSC, and Nancy Beale (UCSD), Chair of the Heads of Circulation, to clarify the respective roles of the two groups.

H.  CDL Resource Liaisons.

French distributed a draft proposal and charge for campus-based "Resource Liaisons" who would each: monitor a specific CDL resource for its technical performance and content; identify possible enhancements, consistent with basic functional criteria; coordinate collegial input; review training material and recommend training activities; communicate enhancement requests and and report performance failures to providers in coordination with Sherry Willhite (CDL); report quarterly activities to CDL User Services; report to French issues which might affect license renewal; and review and compile use data.  These activities are based on similar work done by the OHIOLINK "watchdogs."

SOPAG endorsed French's proposal in concept, leaving open the process by which these liaisons (one per product, not one per campus) would be appointed.

Future SOPAG Meetings will begin at 9:30 a.m. and adjourn at 2:30 p.m., a schedule which is more convenient to all members.