DOCUMENT DELIVERY GROUP
August 2, 2000
Present: Mary Angelotti, John Gallagher, Mike DiMassa, Holly Grossetta Nardini, Carol Jones, Sue Lorimer, Danuta Nitecki, May Robertson
Absent: Matthew Beacom, Susan Burdick, Denise Hersey, Maureen Malone Jones, Lisa Thomas
Meetings are every Wednesday from 1:00-3:00 in SML 411 (except August 9 when we’ll meet in SML 409)
ILLiad contacted Carol to inquire whether we would like to have them visit us late in the week of August 14. We decided it was too early to begin to look in depth at any one vendor. Carol will contact them.
Audrey Novak will meet with us on August 9 to discuss the formation of the Orbis2 Document Delivery Work Group. Although the work of this group will be conducted by the entire Document Delivery Group, official Orbis2 Work Group membership will exclude those already serving on other Orbis2 work groups (Matthew, Denise, Carol, and Susan).
Danuta reported that Carnegie Mellon didn’t produce an RFP for an ILL management system, but will forward relevant parts of an earlier message from Joan Stein concerning their evaluation process. She received no response from either Cal Tech or the New Jersey State Library concerning their evaluation procedures. She did share copies of a document the Library of Congress is using to solicit evaluations of Warehouse Management Systems and felt there were elements included there that we could incorporate. She will also share with us copies of the LSF software procurement process document and of the internal document developed for review of the LSF systems.
II. Report of the Document Delivery Group to SQIC (August 9)
The final report of the first Document Delivery Group will be presented to SQIC by Danuta and Holly. An update on the work of our group would be scheduled for August 23 or possibly after Labor Day. Only a brief written document would be expected at that time, a half page at most.
III. Our timetable
The Group agreed on the following timetable through September 20:
IV. The document delivery system requirements document
We decided to structure our requirements document in the following way:
A discussion of the environment in which we’re currently working [Sue will write]
Known citation; specify time needed, cost will pay, pick-up location
[This outline defines the progress of a request/item in a filled/found scenario; be sure to enumerate requirements when a search or a process is unsuccessful as well.]
Assignments have been made to write drafts of the first six sections of the requirements for the next meeting. These sections should include:
We will meet again on Wednesday, August 9 from 1:00-3:00 in SML 409.