ORBIS2 MMG MEETING NOTES
23 May 2000, 11:00 12:30 p.m., SML 409
PRESENT: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org (chair),
email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,
firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org,
AGENDA ANNOTATED WITH MEETING NOTES
1. Review and act on re-drafted statement of threshold requirements for Orbis2.
The MMG approved the final version of the Threshold Requirements document with minor revisions. The final version is now posted to the http://www.library.yale.edu/orbis2/public/orbis2.htm
2. Report on next steps regarding charges to the Work Groups responsible for developing evaluation criteria for Orbis2 systems, and
3. Preliminary discussion of membership for the Work Groups charged with developing evaluation criteria.
Audrey and Scott will re-draft the charges to the Work Groups using a consistent format, clarifying the dual products we seek (environmental descriptions and feature checklists), adding additional examples and identifying overlapping responsibilities.
The MMG identified candidates for chairs of the Business, Readers, Records and Systems Work Groups.
4. Preliminary discussion of organizing our work at the ALA meetings. Proposed goals: information seeking through conversations with vendors and colleagues at other libraries.
Possible means of seeking information from vendors: (1) Encourage all interested library staff to visit vendor exhibits, exercise the systems, and ask questions; and (2) schedule group meetings for available MMG members with each of the four most likely vendors. This information gathering should, wherever possible and appropriate, test the utility of our evaluation criteria and yield information relevant to those criteria.
Possible means of seeking information from colleagues: (1) Encourage all
interested library staff to confer with colleagues at other libraries about
their experience with vendor products. In addition, (2) request selected
staff to attend or convene meetings, as appropriate, to seek peer comment
on the overall environment in which they are implementing systems and on
the functionality of vendor products in certain key areas (e.g., cataloging,
systems, acquisitions, circulation). This information gathering should, wherever
possible and appropriate, test the utility of our evaluation criteria and
yield information relevant to those criteria.
The MMG discussed the advantages and disadvantages of gathering information about replacement LMS products at ALA. They recognized that some of the information will be 'gossip',' but felt that off-the-record information of this kind is valuable for identifying issues that need closer scrutiny. Members agreed that all interested staff attending ALA should be encouraged to visit vendor exhibits to exercise systems and to confer with colleagues at other libraries about their experience. Staff will be asked to prepare a brief report of their findings.
The MMG will not meet formally with each of the four most likely vendors. Instead, Audrey will arrange formal meetings for the Orbis2 Project Manager. MMG members interested and available are welcome to attend these meetings.
MMG members were mixed in their opinion about the desirability of requesting that selected staff engage systematically with colleagues at ALA by attending or convening separate meeting. Audrey will recast this proposal for our next meeting.