Summit Catalog Committee-Steering Team

September 22, 2006

Lewis and Clark College

Members attending in person:

            Lewis and Clark: Mark Dahl

            Oregon Health & Science University: Janet Crum

            Oregon State University: Michael Boock

            Southern Oregon University: Kate Cleland-Sipfle

            University of Washington: Joe Kiegel

            Washington State University: Marilyn Von Seggern

Consortium Staff: Nancy Nathanson,

1. Welcome and introductions

Welcome and introductions.

2. Liaison reports

All were asked if their groups had input; most has solicited input from their contacts. Kate Cleland-Sipfle’s contacts brought up a total of five questions from two member institutions:

·         Will Summit enable WebpacPro? – Discussion: Nancy reported that Summit has had Millennium 2006 loaded, and implementation takes time based on input from members; consultation would happen before making a decision at the Orbis Cascade level.  The 2006 implementation was not smooth, with limits not holding on pass-through searches, for example.  Nancy recalls that WebpacPro is available for INN-Reach.  OHSU has it and likes it, according to Janet, but Right Results, for example, doesn’t fall in correct order.  Mark noted that this issue will likely be addressed as part of SCC’s charge from Council this year.

·         Can the Catalog Committee work on anything not recommended/charged by the Executive Council? – Discussion: Many issues will fit under the charges from the Executive Committee.  Otherwise, small details might be appropriate to work on, but not policy matters—not enough time.

·         Does the Council’s discussion about a single catalog for all libraries deserve discussion at the Catalog Committee level? – Discussion:  Yes, this falls under the charge, as this is an area the Executive Committee wants the Committee to look into possible new search interface for ILS.  This is not to be confused with the Executive Committee agenda item regarding a single ILS, which is not part of the Catalog Committee charge.

·         Should we set up a Catalog Committee group to discuss use of alternate metadata and its possible migration into Summit? – Discussion: There could be a small group working on alternate metadata, since there is a structure for interest groups, but the full Catalog Committee has too full an agenda.  Local decisions are being made about alternate metadata.  Mark suggested that interested parties come together and work on this outside of SCC.

·         Should we revisit Summit cataloging policies? – Alternate wording: Is this group appropriate for recommendations and complaints regarding Summit cataloging policies? – Discussion:   The charge regarding the Summit Interface might lead to usability issues calling for changes in cataloging policies.  Otherwise, a suggestion was made for a cataloging advisory group, either permanent or ad hoc (problem-based), that wouldn’t need to meet in person, but could work on an issue. The steering committee would need to coordinate and report the results of such a process.  Specific issues might include the successive entry problem for serials and categories of duplicates.  Nancy explained that the scope of the Alliance Catalog Committee is bigger picture and forward-thinking, less about cataloging practices.  Mark noted that some of these issues will be addressed as part of SCC’s charge to minimize duplicates.

3. Working Group actions and Topics for next year

As proposed (based on recommendation from Executive Committee and subject to approval by Council), SCC is charged with:

  • Data Harvesting Summit  - Explore Summit’s potential as a source of data (bibliographic, item, order, circulation, etc.) for the purpose of developing improved services and informing decisions made by member libraries and the consortium.  Given the integrated nature of INN-Reach and Millennium, it is expected that any such data may be available through Summit or local catalog systems.  Potential applications include development of a new Summit interface, analysis of usability, cooperative collection development, and accreditation.  In pursuing this charge, SCC is asked to consult with the Accreditation Document Task Force, Collection Development & Management Committee and summit Borrowing Committee. 
  • Summit Search Interface - Explore Summit usability and develop recommendations concerning potential new user interfaces to the Summit union catalog.  Activity includes
    • Summit interface update based on Release 2006
    • Exploration of III options available to Inn-Reach systems
    • Exploration of non-III operations

·         Open WorldCat link to Summit – Pursue this initiative as described in SCC’s May 2006 report

·         Google link to Summit – Continue to pursue this initiative as described in SCC’s May 2006 report

Duplicates – Develop technical, policy, and workflow recommendations to prevent duplicate bibliographic records and/or mitigation [of] the impact of duplicate records on patron service

Review of Action items: We reviewed SCC recommendations to Executive Council at their July 13-14 meeting in light of Executive Committee’s proposed charge to SCC.

  • Work for less record duplication for electronic resources in Summit by pursuing the use of a special 001 field for ERM brief records, ISSN matching for journal bib records, and developing standards for using the 001 field for e-book records – Discussion:  This is part of the charge pertaining to duplicate reduction.
  • Request an INN-Reach enhancement for a “link resolver router” that would direct patrons to their local link resolver from Summit records (this would allow patrons to identify their library’s electronic holdings for a journal easily). – Discussion:  Volunteer needed, and there are two routes for enhancement, through IUG, and through the III regular channels (enhance@iii.com).  See Action Items.
  • Conduct usability testing on Summit to: evaluate how patrons navigate journal holdings information, discover how patrons are using Summit (as their primary or secondary catalog?), and generally to identify areas where improvement is needed. – Discussion: This is folded into the new Council user interface charge. 

 Search Engines

  • Add a Summit link to OCLC Open WorldCat – Discussion: OCLC was not interested in having Summit as part of their Zip Code option for nearest library; their current policy is to have user directed to nearest library, Mike Boock reminded us that what is wanted is the option for Orbis Cascade member to have Open WorldCat offer both a link to a library’s local catalog and to Summit. See Action Items.
  • Create a Summit link within Google Scholar – Discussion: Mark Dahl can update us later in the meeting, since this is part of the charge.
  • Provide recommendations and education to member libraries regarding linking to and optimizing links from Open WorldCat, Open URL resolvers and new search engine services.  – Discussion:  This has been dropped, but there will be a need for help once Open WorldCat is set up.

 New topics to address for 06-07 (SCC to Council)

  • Review record policies governing the way that bibliographic records are contributed to Summit in order to improve record quality and reduce duplicates. – This falls under the “Duplicates” charge.
  • Work toward “next generation” functionality for Summit including a redesigned Summit interface and richer data for Summit records including book jackets and TOC data.  Usability testing of the current Summit catalog would be part of the process of moving to a “next generation” Summit catalog.  Make Summit data available for harvesting by member libraries for analysis and local projects. – Discussion: All of this falls under Council proposed charge for SCC.
  • Develop ways to identify Summit member holdings on bibliographic records in OCLC to aid in cataloging and acquisitions and reduce duplicate records in Summit. – Discussion: Orbis Cascade already has a holdings symbol (OBS) available to use in OCLC, as a result of purchasing NetLibrary MARC records. This is potentially folded into the duplicates portion of the charge.

 

Action items from Agenda item 3

  • Draft III link resolver/router enhancement request (Crum)

       --Distribute draft to Summit Catalog Committee (Nathanson)

  • Follow up on Summit link to OCLC Open WorldCat which would give each institution to have the search go to local library and SUMMIT (Boock)

4. Schedule for committee work

Organization: How will the committee accomplish all of the following action items in the next year?  We decided to form work groups, as last year, to address each action item.

Data Harvesting Summit - Discussion: Janet Crum recommended parallel tracks, one researching what can be done with the current Summit configuration and another looking into future configurations.  We need people that understand the structure of III data, data needs, and harvesting techniques.  Mark Kibbey and Mike Spalti were recommended as members of this work group.  Circulation data is challenging, because much of it resides on local servers. 

o        Decisions:  Mark Dahl will represent the SCC Steering Committee.  The Collection and Development and Borrowing groups would be represented or at least have a named contact to consult with.  Make sure no patron data is included!  Nancy or anyone in her stead would be the Orbis Cascade staff representative to work with on data harvesting (someone who understands how the data is stored). 

Summit Search Interface – Discussion: - Working groups will need to deal with usability separately from exploring options for searching.  This appears to need two groups, one for “short term”(Phase 1) that will investigate what to do within Millennium 2006 and WebpacPro, and survey for current problems needing a quick fix. Usability studies go with the “short term” issues (visionaries have nothing to test).  A separate group (Phase 2) would look at the long term issues and need to survey where members are starting to figure out if SCC ‘s approach should start with local catalogs or Summit.  The Phase II group can look into Endeca, AquaBrowser, and OCLC‘s developing WorldCat product.  As for III, it will offer faceted searching in 2007.  Janet thinks in terms of a two-year view for the Phase II group in terms of making recommendations to the Executive Committee and help everyone make a good decision based on good information (and not have to take a just OK product), although it is hard to speculate how close Council could get to an action item based on Phase It’s work. Keep member surveys together; avoid multiple surveys.

o        Decisions: Kate Cleland-Sipfle and Marilyn Von Seggern will be responsible for the “Quick Fix” or Millennium 2006 phase catalog interface interest group (Phase I).  They will need to add some public services people.  The Phase II group will be led by Janet Crum and Joe Kiegel.  Mike Boock can work with either one.  The groups will need to communicate with each other.

Open World Cat – see Agenda 3 and Action Items.

Google link to Summit – Discussion: Nancy and Mark have been communicating with Mike Spalti about this.  Issues: 1. Google asked for records, but a) not certain kinds, and b) full MARC data.   Nancy sent some with a range of different attributes.  There is uncertainty about the ongoing impact on Orbis Cascade staff of sending batches of records at regular intervals.  2. Mike Boock asked,  “What would a Google link add that we don’t get with Open WorldCat?”  3. Some records might need to be excluded (e.g. proprietary records for eresources: members' contracts with vendors, and with use of OCLC records).  4. There are questions about Google and holdings display. Default is home school for Google Scholar. 5. There could be problems with broken links to records as Summit records occasionally get a new B# (e.g. change in master record ownership).

Mark demonstrated the use of Google’s Union Catalog functionality for the Libris Consortium (Sweden).  If we did this for Summit, it would allow users to see Summit holdings on the result screens of Google Scholar searches, whereas users would need to click through Open WorldCat to get to Summit with the OpenWorld cat link.  Link resolver vendors tell Google holdings in XML format; a similar format would be needed from Summit.  Google button for the library in question says “Library Search,” so it might not be clear that it is Summit.  Google also shows all links, even if not held by local library.  IP ranges of members could be sent to Google.  This (Open WorldCat link) seems not to be the most important of the data harvesting issues.  More information is needed about XML servers.  Mike Spalti will be reporting to SCC on his work with Google in October or November.

o        Decision: Fold Google link into the data harvesting charge and work group.

Duplicates – Discussion: Janet wants to share OHSU’s experience in this area.  Nancy is working on a memo regarding prevention of loading duplicates.  Would the steering committee want to propose solutions?  Nancy suggested polling the entire committee to identify interested parties, such as those who have worked on the 001 field problem for electronic books (Pam Smith and Terry Reese, for example).  A possible action would be petitioning III to add the 001’s to ERM records.  Also consider  e-books and batch loads of records from vendors other than OCLC.  More process is needed on the 001 issue.  There are other issues (avoiding overlay of brief records based on ISSN, for example).  Janet can be a resource person.  Should electronic resources be emphasized?  Nancy said no, batch loads are a big problem. Also, Summit policy does not match on 022 fields, due to lack of consistency is successive entries.  Should this be reconsidered?  Janet sees it as a possible solution to the ERM problem.  Mark emphasized the need for this group to focus on big problems and high-impact solutions

o        Decision: Mike Boock will represent the Steering Team on this work group.  Facilitators of groups may or may not be Steering Team members.

5. Follow-up

Follow-up:  Phone meeting after Council Meeting (Oct. 5-6).  For all cases, survey to recruit interested Catalog Committee members to work groups is needed.  Mark will put together a draft of the charges for each workgroup as soon as minutes are published.  Nancy will adapt last year’s survey used to recruit workgroup members and send out a draft to the Steering Team to review.  

If the charges are approved by Council as written and understood, launch survey October 9.  Leave it on the server until October 20, and follow with a phone meeting no earlier than October 24, and assign people to work groups by November 1.  Also develop timeline for workgroups by phone during late October phone meeting.

Minutes prepared by:  Kate Cleland-Sipfle; September 28, 2006

approved: Mark Dahl Oct. 11, 2006