D R A F T D R A F T D R A F T D R A F T D R A F T
D R A F T D R A F T D R A F T D R A F T D R A F T

Minutes of the University Digital Library Review Committee
Organizational Meeting
September 29, 1997

The task force held it first meeting on September 29, 1997 at the University of Central Florida. All members were able to attend. They were Barry Baker (UCF), Rosann Bazirjian (FSU), Sherry Carrillo (FIU), Jim Corey (FCLA, guest), Janice Donahue (FAU), John Hein (UNF), Martha Hruska (UF), Mark Hinnebusch (FCLA), Cedric Jones (FAMU), Margaret Jones (FAMU), Grady Morein (UWF, chair), Michele Newberry (FCLA), Pamela Tucker (USF), Shixing Wen (FGCU).

The meeting focused on getting acquainted with one another and with the issues and on organizing ourselves.

As a first step in getting acquainted with issues, a round-robin discussions was conducted wherein each member shared with the group his/her particular interest in terms of key requirements of a new system. This discussion resulted in identifying a number of elements vital to our task. We then had extensive discussion on the following topics:

  • current library technology environment -- led by Jim Corey
  • charge/role of the task force
  • the review process
  • sources of information
  • ways for the task force to share information
  • work procedures
  • role of FCLA

    • The principal issues to emerge from the round-robin sharing include a listing of desired outcomes in terms of what a new system should provide. These were grouped under 8 topics from acquisitions to reporting. Of particular concern is that we “don’t lose more function than is gained,” and there was some apprehension that the “desired” system may not exist. All-in-all, however, the discussion helped members to begin focusing on key issues. In assessing the current library technology environment, a number of “big issues” were identified. These range from a concern that many of the “newer systems” are not yet well developed to a realization that we do not want to narrow our options prematurely.

    The discussion of the charge & role of the task force opened the question of whether we will need to get some clarification on our charge and role as we progress. As we developed a review process, however, is became evident that we needed to develop and conduct both a RFI and an RFP and that we needed to spend considerable time defining what needs to be specified in each of these requests.

    In exploring sources of information we determined that there are some models available, but we need to be cautious in using them, because our situation has a number of unique elements. We especially noted that a consortium is very different from a single institution. Some of the RFIs and RFPs which we can explore include those of Georgia, OhioLink, WLRC, ILLINET, Michigan, the Library of Congress and most likely others.

    We agreed to develop ways for the task force to share information and to refine work procedures as we progress in our efforts. However, the committee did construct an initial process for approaching its analysis. The decision was made to involve as many staff as possible in the process by establishing subcommittees for each major functional area. Seven areas were identified and for each area a task force member volunteered to establish a subcommittee and chair the group. The seven areas and chairs are:

    1. Acquisitions – Rosann
    2. Cataloging/Authority Control -- Martha
    3. ILL – Sherry
    4. Circulation – Shixing
    5. Serials Control -- Janice
    6. OPAC/Reference Databases/Gateways -- Pam
    7. Collection Maintenance --John
    8. System Administration -- Michele and Mark

    The committee also decided that every effort should be made to utilize existing committees in these areas and to work with the technical services planning committee and the public services planning committee to form other committees as needed. Since many of the individuals serving on subcommittees will be attending the Joint Meeting on November 19-20, 1997.

    In concluding we decided that each chair would prepare a list of subfunctions which will form the basis for the subcommittees’ work. This list is to be complete by October 31 and sent to Grady who will post each list on his ftp serve. Each chair will also try to arrange to get together with subcommittee members at this Joint Meeting in November. There was some discussion as to how the chairs should proceed. The decision was to leave to leave the process open, but to focus on identifying the needs and requirements of each functional area.

    Our next meeting will be December 12, 1997 at University of Central Florida. Special thanks to Barry Baker for hosting the meeting and to Mark Hinnebusch for keeping notes of the meeting.