Notes from the June 2001 e-cat comm meeting.
Small turnout today, but good ideas from all.
First, our next meeting is July 10. It is a Tuesday at the usual time, 10:30 to 12 noon, and in SML 411.
That is a week after our usually scheduled meeting (the 3rd of July did not seem like a good choice.)
Our meeting was organized largely around the 4 themes: training & documentation, workflows & communication, batch processing, and visibility & communication.
1. Training & documentation
Patracia Thurston has revised or edited the draft E-monographs cheat sheet. It is still a draft doc. The draft was distributed to the members present at the meeting today. The draft was not discussed. Paula Ball has been using the draft for reference and the examples in the draft are from her work.
ACTIONS: 1. Put the draft as is on the e-cat Web site. 2. BEACOM and ODDO and OTHERS? will review new draft, reformat the document per Cat. Dept. Web document guidelines (also in draft form . . .) and send out to others for further review.
We are making progress in training C&T staff to catalog e-resources. We are being forced to since Jerry Ann Dickel in the Cat. Dept. Arts & Sciences team has moved to the Hebraica cataloging team. We have identified the next two C&Ts in the Cat. Dept. to be trained to copy catalog e-resources: Celio Ricardo in the Arts & Sciences team and Pina Scalzo in the History & Social Sciences team.
ACTION: BEACOM will train Celio and Pina and assign e-resoucre copy cataloging work to them in consultation with the team leaders to whom Celio and Pina report. The bulk of the training should take place in July. I'll report on progress at the next meeting.
Documentation for teaching and supporting staff who copy catalog e-resources is still being written. I have not made any progress beyond the first of 3 documents for e-serials. (The draft for the e-monographs helps a lot, thanks, Tony, Paula, and Patricia.)
ACTION: BEACOM will draft these other 2 documents for e-serials by our next meeting, July 10.
We discussed the new emphasis at Yale of the PCC core catalog standards and the possible impact on our work. So far our work with e-resources has been a case of special handling. We have been editing full level cataloging to bring it into compliance with local practices: not just holdings data, but extra tracings for corporate bodies representing e-services like ScienceDirect and genre tracings.
ACTION: BEACOM will discuss with Joan Swanekamp and report to the committee at or before the next meeting.
2. Batch processing
1. Batch CLARR is being tested now. Beacom is working with Marsha Cornelius of LSO to get the process ready. The first target set of records are those for the Making of America Project titles. There are about 7,500 titles in this set. (They are in two batches now. One of 1500 and one of 5000.) Following the loading of the MOA records, we hope to add the records for the Chadwyck-Healey titles by the end of the summer. Other record sets that could be added this way include records for the titles in the GALE products now available via iCONN.
In short, the records will be loaded from a workstation to ORBDEV7 and then moved from ORBDEV7 to ORBIS production region. This is both a practical precaution against errors in load that could bring down or damage the ORBIS database and a way in which we can pre-process the records for loading into ORBIS. Additional pre-processing may happen before the records are loaded into ORBDEV7. The records are available to us in ascii format and in MARC format. The ascii files can be manipulated before loading using word processing tools.
ACTION: BEACOM will work with Marsha Cornelius to load the MOA records by July 10.
BEACOM will contact Sue Roberts about the Chadwyck-Healey title sets.
BEACOM will ask CDC or other group about cataloging the titles available via iCONN: are these titles in our collection? Do we want our readers to have access to them via Orbis?
3. Workflows & communication
Laurel Bliss prompted Beacom and Parker to clarify the relationship between YELMO and ORBIS.
YELMO is most importantly from their view an e-resource administration management system. It helps us manage titles, licenses, vendors, contacts, etc. It also has an important public service function as it can be used to present e-resources in many ways to our readers.
ORBIS is much more than this, and is not limited to e-resources. However, the YELMO project databases do a better job with managing the administrative information about e-resources and displaying lists of the e-resources
on the Web. ORBIS 2 will not be much different, though it will be better as it has a native Web interface for the catalog.
We'd like there to be a fluid and dynamic relationship between YELMO and ORBIS in terms of what records are where first. We envision the two tools as feeding one another data. For example, YELMO might gather data from the Vendor for a set of e-resources--issn, url, title, etc--and could feed a provisional MARC record to ORBIS. This process could be very rapid. Or conversely, a set of records from ORBIS could be downloaded into YELMO providing better controlled vocabulary access to service designed around the titles in YELMO.
ACTION: BEACOM and PARKER to discuss YELMO <--> ORBIS relationship at their next meeting and focus on moving records from YELMO into ORBIS.
Discussion of workflow led to discussion of the retreat being planned. That took us to our 4th theme, visibility & communication.
4. The retreat / non-retreat is off. Ann Okerson thinks the workflow issues are too specific for the retreat we seemed to be planning and the larger theme of access to e-resources at Yale seemed to lack an urgent problem or critical action issue to motivate such a gathering of decision-makers.
Two ideas came out of this. 1. Work on workflows anyway. 2. have a forum not a retreat.
1. work on workflows anyway.
We need to make a start on this. Who are the current e-resource workflows. Kim and Matthew need to work on this. Write something up. Others want to help?
ACTION: PARKER and BEACOM to meet and draft short version of the problems with current workflows. Will send out to e-cat comm and others. Then will work on fleshing out the workflow analysis based on feed back and other inputs.
2. Forum not a retreat!
If we want to raise awareness about e-resource access issues at Yale and Yale library, if we want to increase the understanding of the staff about these issues, and if we want to get the library to begin to think systematically and strategically about these issues we should do a forum not a retreat. It is more inclusive.
Ideas presented led to the following considerations.
Theme: user access to e-resources at Yale and Yale Library: where are we now? where should we go? how do we get there from here?
what do our users need/want?
what should we be selecting?
how should we present e-resources to users?
what is the role of the catalog? the Front door, YELMO?
how should we be organizing ourselves?
What tools do we need? Does one size fit all or should we have many specialized tools?
Is text all there is or do we want to look at images, crunch numbers, & listen to music?
Outcomes: What deliverables? -- lists of ideas generated. what follow ups? -- action items for various groups
Format: mix of presentations and brainstorming exercises
Date: late October (say the week of the 22nd?) 90 minutes say 10 to 11:30.
Location: SML Lecture hall?
Presenters or Facilitors: Beacom and Parker, others?