The Government Printing Office (GPO) has just released 8 new collections into the Federal Digital System (FDsys) -- http://www.fdsys.gov/. That brings the number of collections in FDsys to 21 -- very cool indeed. The new collections are:

• Congressional Directory (105th Congress to present)
• Congressional Record (Bound) (1999 to 2001)
• Congressional Record Index (1983 to present)
• Economic Report of the President (1995 to present)
• GAO Reports and Comptroller General Decisions (1994 to 2008)
• History of Bills (1983 to present)
• United States Government Manual (1995/1996 to present)
• United States Statutes at Large (2003 to 2006)

The Congressional Directory, Congressional Record (Bound), United States Government Manual, and United States Statutes at Large will be available with authenticated digital signatures.

There is a capabilities release schedule with an API and several other useful functionalities scheduled to be operational in 2010, only a few months away.

Given all the hubbub about the GPO purl server crash over 2 weeks ago (and counting), I decided to re-read FDSys Releases and Capabilities version 5.0 (PDF). There's nothing in the document about the migration from purls to handles (which seems to have been put on some back burner in a back closet). There's mention of "System Backup/Restore" (section 4.6.13), but this being a "definitions" document, there's no discussion about *how* the system backup/restore will occur nor how the system "shall support an average peak time availability of 99.7%." I hope that information regarding system infrastructure backup and redundancy is soon forthcoming.

[Update: 10/13/09: I've revised my thinking on the cloud as the term is loaded and doesn't really mean what I'm describing. A friend from the San Diego Supercomputer Center said, "some greybeards are going back to the original metaphor: the grid" and suggested the term "shared digital libraries" which is good. But what I'm describing is more like a biological ecosystem, the FDLP ecosystem. jrj]

Last week's GPO purl server crash should be disconcerting to both the documents community and the public at large (in fact, although the hardware's been restored, resolution is ongoing as I write). I know GPO staff are just as worried about this and are doing everything they can to fix the purl server.

"The PURL Server is currently inaccessible. GPO is working with IT staff to restore service as soon as possible. We regret any inconvenience caused by the server problems. An updated listserv will be sent once service is restored."

But in the meantime, there are 1250+ library catalogs and innumerable links to government documents that are not working. The crash of a critical piece of GPO's infrastructure brings a couple of things to mind:

1) What worries me about this is that FDsys and it's supposed upgrade in hardware/software/systems design is for all intents and purposes the same as GPOaccess. That is, FDsys is a monolith where the failure of one piece can cause the whole system to ground to a halt. As our readers know, we've been advocating for a long time for a distributed digital FDLP (a *true* "digital depository" system!). We're heartened by what we see of FDsys so far, but we need to be building a system with built-in redundancies.

I envision a collaborative and distributed system of digital content, collaborative cataloging/metadata creation, as well as technical infrastructure. With this kind of system in place, a failed purl server will only cause a momentary blip in service as a backup purl server kicks on instead of a several week+ outage. How many system degradations (WAIS) and failures (purl server) until we shift our thinking from "client-server" (with libraries decidedly on the "client" side of the equation) to "Peer-to-peer" concepts and build systems with built-in redundancies that mirror what the FDLP has been for the last 150 years? How long before we build an FDLP cloud?

(**made with IHMC Cmap tools**)

2) There was an interesting discussion of purl server outage on the code4lib list including a good workaround from a technological standpoint (pasted email below). It points to the fact/reminder that what we do within the FDLP has an affect on others in the wider library community (not to mention the public at large!) and that "our" content and the systems built to serve that content is critical for the work of others whether we know it or not. It also points to the need for us to reach out to those communities in order to build systems of use to both end-users as well as those building other systems, mashups, repositories etc. So I would highly recommend that we be *more* proactive in connecting with other communities within the library community (LITA, CODE4LIB, WEB4LIB, ACRL, state associations etc) as well as outside the FDLP (govt transparency community, historians and other academic communities, journalists etc).

------------------ CODE4LIB POST (with added info by James re MARC view) --------------------------------

Thanks to everyone who helped me confirm that the GPO PURL server is down. An official announcement on the GPO Listserv said:

"The PURL Server is currently inaccessible. GPO is working with IT staff to restore service as soon as possible. We regret any inconvenience caused by the server problems. An updated listserv will be sent once service is restored."

While the server is down, here is one workaround (thanks to Patricia Duplantis):

1. Copy the purl link listed in your library catalog
2. Go to http://catalog.gpo.gov/
3. Click "Advanced Search"
4. Search for word in "URL/PURL", enter the PURL
5. Click "Go"
6. In MARC view, the original URL at the time of cataloging should appear in a 53x note.

This incident, however, illuminates a weakness in PURL systems: access is broken when the PURL server breaks, even though the documents are still online at their original URLs.

Maybe someone more familiar with PURL systems can tell me... is there any way to harvest data from a PURL server, so that a backup/mirror can be available?

Keith

--that is all.

Peggy Garvin has a new article that covers the basics of searching for Congressional information in GPO's Federal Digital System (FDsys). Thanks Peggy!

The Government Domain - Congressional Documents on FDsys: the Basics, by Peggy Garvin, LLRX (July 27, 2009).

GCN's list of "great" .gov web sites this year includes GPO's FDsys.

• Great .Gov Web Sites SPECIAL REPORT: "10 sites that take online government to the next level" by Joab Jackson, Government Computer News (Jul 27, 2009)

Other sites GCN lists include: data.gov, The California Metropolitan Transportation Commission's Transit.511.org, the U.S. State Department, the State of Utah, and Science.gov.

While the description of FDsys in the GCN article has no new information for those who have been following its development for years, its presence in the list is notable and important for at least two reasons. First, it is the only one of the ten that emphasizes permanence and long term access.

Second, it is revealing to see the technologies that GCN lists for each site. Every site on the list is noted for use of technologies that provide good access and rich content. These include the current batch of usual suspects, from Adobe Flash and Microsoft Silverlight, to RSS and Cascading Style sheets; from Wikipedia and Twitter, to Google keyhole Markup Language and ArcGIS. But only FDsys also includes technologies that are specifically designed for long-term preservation and for authenticating content: The Reference Model for an Open Archival Information System, and "Digital signatures."

Now if we could just combine that with digital deposit into FDLP libraries, we'd be able to multiply the technical guarantees of long-term free public access to government information by the number of participating FDLP libraries.

Today I attended the "Chat with GPO" OPAL session, which focused on authentication and authentication for FDLP partners.Ted Priebe, GPO's Director of Library Planning & Development (LPD) and Lisa Russell, the Manager of LPD's Content Management unit presented material and answered questions.

Basically, LSCM wants to partner with Federal Depository Libraries and find ways to authenticate content hosted by the FDL partners. The digital signatures of authentication will indicate partnership with the FDL institution and the contact information for that institution. This is great news, especially for those FDLs also interested in hosting digital content in partnership with GPO.

The authentication session is archived on the GPO OPAL site.

The Public Printer recently released GPO's letter to the President regarding open government (PDF) (Robert C. Tapella, Public Printer, March 9, 2009). Since it specifically mentions FreeGovInfo, we feel the need to comment and contextualize a bit.

On the one hand, it's great that GPO is reaching out publicly to offer infrastructural help with the government transparency initiative. We're happy to assist in any way we can. We hope FDLP libraries will join GPO in such efforts.

On the other hand, FGI has always argued for a geographically dispersed system of local, official digital repositories, so we cannot support GPO’s goal 1 to make FDsys the official repository for Federal Government publications -- unless it includes a network of distributed repositories modeled after the Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP). What we can support is FDSys as the official distribution channel for federal government publications.

It's not a trivial distinction. "Repository" means that GPO assumes sole responsibility for preservation, a role not specified in legislation. "Distribution channel" means GPO continues its solid century and a half record of distributing information to other institutions which will continue their solid century and a half record of preserving government information for future use while making sure it remains freely available over the internet. Since digital deposit is currently #2 on The Sunlight Foundation's Our Open Government List (OOGL) of top ideas for the President's open government initiative, we can only assume that the public -- or at least those that are most interested in government transparency -- agrees that a geographically dispersed system is a key ingredient in government transparency.

We also believe it is important in discussions of transparency to plan for preservation of and long-term access to information. If, in concentrating on short-term access and on information-as-service, we fail to consider long-term access and instantiation of information for long-term preservation, we will inevitably lose information -- and that would be bad for transparency.

Incomplete Access

We commend and support GPO for building APIs into FDSys. It is heartening and encouraging to see that GPO is publicly and officially proclaiming that "access" means more than providing a web site. But APIs and a web site are only two of the three parts of a complete access system. GPO has yet to acknowledge or even mention the third part of access: the provision of unfiltered bulk data access to government information.

A GPO web site can provide a human-friendly interface for the public and APIs can provide a computer-program-friendly way of querying, fetching, and using information. But, even taken together, these two access points provide only the government-approved, government-designed, government-hosted view of government information.

The problem with these government-only views of government information is that they are limited. No single provider (government or non-government) can provide unlimited access points or views or interfaces.

APIs are not magic. Each is a design for access and the product of choices made by the designer. Each has its own constraints built in. For example, an API might be tied to a particular agency or department, which would limit cross-agency utility. Or an API might be generalized to work across agencies or departments and thus lose rich access to agency-specific information content or structure.

One way to overcome these limitations is for the government to provide bulk data access. This means allowing the public to download raw content in bulk. Where web sites provide one "page" at a time and APIs can provide one or many "facts" at a time, bulk data access provides the raw information so that users can build their own collections, interfaces, and APIs.

This could improve access in ways that GPO could never hope to do all by itself. Imagine, for example, an agricultural library building a digital collection that contains agricultural reports, data, and audio visual content from the The Department of Agriculture, the EPA, the SBA, and NOAA combined with reports, maps, and GIS data from state and local government agencies and other content from its own institutional repository or university press. Then imagine that specialized digital collection having its own state-specific, agriculture-specific API and web site and bulk data access. Then imagine that these repositories are part of the rapidly expanding cloud and you get a sense of a rich govt information ecology.

Such scenarios are possible, but only if GPO and other government agencies make raw content easily, freely available in bulk for use and re-use and re-purposing. Providing only government web sites and government APIs without bulk data downloads and the ability for others to build collections for specific or general purposes will provide only a tiny fraction of open usability and transparency that we could have. There is nothing standing in the way of this happening today except the will of government agencies to make it happen.

Incomplete Preservation

The Public Printer's letter glosses over the problems of long-term access and preservation.

Let's be as clear as we can: we cannot and should not rely solely on GPO for long-term preservation and free access. The shift to digital does not change the methodology for long-term preservation and access. On the contrary, the tenuousness of digital information means that a distributed methodology is even more vital.

We cannot rely solely on GPO because the GPO Electronic Information Access Enhancement Act of 1993 does not even mention permanent access, nor does it guarantee that access will always be free. Indeed, the law specifically allows GPO to charge for access and even for use of its "directory" of information. The law also covers only "appropriate publications distributed by the Superintendent of Documents" -- effectively excluding huge bodies of born-digital information from the scope of what is GPO is allowed to handle. Regardless of GPO's intentions, there is no existing legislative mandate for GPO to provide free, permanent, public access to government information and we therefore cannot rely on it alone to do so.

We should not rely solely on GPO because no single digital archive or repository can ever be as secure and safe as multiple archives, libraries, and repositories. Even if GPO had a legislative mandate to provide permanent preservation and access (which it does not), and even if anyone could guarantee that GPO would always get adequate funding so that it never had to withdraw anything or charge for access for anything (which no one can), it would still be impossible to guarantee that GPO would never lose any information. The nature of digital information is that it can easily be corrupted, altered, lost, or destroyed. It can become unreadable or unusable without constant attention. Relying on any single entity is simply not as safe as relying on multiple organizations. It is more than a truism that Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe -- safer than backups and "mirror sites." But this is about more than redundant copies. It is also about relying on different organizations because they have different funding sources, different constituencies, different technologies, and different collections. No single digital collection can ever be as safe as multiple, reliable digital collections.

The good news

The good news is that there are existing organizations that can start working on this right away. There is nothing standing in the way of GPO and the existing FDLP libraries from implementing a digital depository system in which GPO enables FDLP libraries to download bulk data and build local digital collections.

There are existing technologies to facilitate this. The U.S. Government Documents Private LOCKSS Network is preserving "harvested" government information. Peer-to-peer (P2P) networks (like Napster and BitTorrent) have become increasingly popular because more and more people and some businesses have begun to realize that "distributed files" equals faster access and better preservation. (A geographically dispersed system of local, official digital repositories would be, for all intents and purposes, a P2P network.) Open source software for building digital repositories is widely available and increasingly easy to use.

Summary

APIs are good. They are a necessary part of adequate government information access. But digital distribution is also essential because only digital distribution will enable FDLP libraries and others to build new APIs, to de-ghettoize government information by better integrating it with non-government information, and to ensure long-term, free, public access and usability of government information.

A Washington Times article about FDsys describes it as GPO's "Google" for Federal Documents:

Web users could just as easily use Google or other search engines to find government information, but FDsys assures access to the original, authentic versions of government documents.

I am amused by the comments posted to this article so far:

Why would you call this "Google" for documents, unless you are simply try to get web hits by using the google name. I went to the site and it is not immediately clear where in tarnation to find anything. I'm 38, computer literate and immediately find the site unappealing, and definitely not user friendly. The genius of google is it's simplicity. The GPO site is just like the GPO building itself Old, archaic, and difficult to navigate. I suppose if I was in the business of publishing paper copies, I wouldn't want people finding things easily online either.

Perhaps a government documents librarian could help you navigate it? ;-)

$20 million, five years, and it's still not as good as Google - classic government work.
Why didn't they just give the docs to Google and let them do it?

Because Google would mess it up even worse. Look at Google Books and how they block full access to public domain government documents! Sigh...why did the article have to mention Google?

I found the search engine very easy to use and very powerful -- apparently it's metadata-aware, so it can do much more sophisticated searches than Google allows. It also looks like they built in a nice drilldown feature that lets you find what you're looking for when you don't know what you're looking for.

Glad this user noticed that. And my favorite quote:

It's a good start at providing information to interested citizens.
The information overload will be intense.

Yes, it is a good start. But the info overload is already intense!

The Obama administration is well into the civic wilderness of administration at the national level. Several nominations have faltered and failed. The extremely critical , and massive, economic recovery legislation is wallowing in the half-century
long trench philosophical warfare between democrats and republicans. Obama attempts to include the republicans in the discussion, they continue to hold their approval. So far the age of bipartisan tranquility is still aborning. Though the election in November clearly pointed the way to a desired change, our political parties do not want to follow the suggestion.

While the quick cannon shot of opportunity fades with time, the Government Printing Office announced today the first public release of FDsys. Described as

"a one-stop site to authentic, published government information. FDsys allows GPO to receive information from federal agencies in all three branches of government and create a repository for permanent, public access. More than 154,000 documents are currently accessible, with additional documents being added daily. FDsys offers incredible search capabilities for users such as: searching by Congressional Committee, a Member of Congress, keyword and date. FDsys will replace GPOAccess in mid-2009 and releases with additional functionality will occur throughout the next several years."

The upshot for this small milestone on the journey to ALA's summer conference -- the more things change, the more they stay the same. We have our work cut out for us. While the GPO continues to evolve in many good ways, and while we have a President whose rhetoric and policy perspective mirrors our own civic sensibilities, we should not be too surprised by the staying power of partisan muck to gum up the civic machinery of hope and change.

See you on Day 15.

Sad to say, for the second time during this Guide of the Week: Transition Edition, I've come up empty. While the General Accountability Office identified the Transition to Digital Television as one of 13 critical transition issues, there appears to be no librarian-produced guides linked to ALA GODORT Handout Exchange Wiki to inform people about this issue. If you know of one, please post it to the Handout Exchange.

As a consolation prize, it turns out that the phrase "Digital Television Transition" is a good way to kick the tires on the public beta of GPO's new FDSys at http://fdsys.gpo.gov. Type in the words without quotes and you'll get 2,654 results. That seems too many to look at once? Then use the "narrow your search" options in the left hand column. You might start with "congressional hearlings (761)" That brings you a new list of "narrow your search" options. From there you might choose "House appropriations committee (81)" After that, try clicking on "see more" under "keywords." Try clicking on "public broadcasting" and you'll find four hearings. The search results contain snippets with your search terms and come from several different congresses.

As long as I'm talking about FDSys, I want to say THANKS to GPO for including "find in a library" links that are equal in effectiveness to their "purchase this item" links.

Next week I'll be dealing with librarian produced guides relating to "Defense Readiness" So if you have any guides relating to that topic, please try and post them to the Handout Exchange this week.

I'm forwarding this heads-up from the Association of Public Data Users (APDU) list. Over the last two weeks, there have been quite a few calls for comment on proposed data collections published in the Federal Register (see below with due date).

Maybe it's because I haven't had my coffee yet this morning, but I was a little peeved by my failed information search. I found the Census Bureau's FR posting (Federal Register: January 7, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 4) Page 672) (btw, I tried in FDsys.gpo.gov but they've not loaded Volume 74 yet) but at first was stymied because the summary page has no link to the Census Bureau's Web site, and does not have contact information or any link to more information. The full listing has the information, but comments must be written, no Web submissions :-|

Ok fine, I go to www.census.gov and after more than 5 minutes of search/browse, give up on finding exactly *how* to submit comments on the proposed "Quarterly Financial Report" or "Survey of Local Government Finances." What's even worse, census.gov does not have a "contact us" link on it's first page. I finally found it in the footer of a second level page, but could find nothing in the Question and Answer Center about RFCs, proposed data sets etc. *sigh*

I guess this is turning into an FDsys comment. I noticed in FDsys that you can sign up to receive the daily Federal Register Table of Contents which is cool. But there needs to be a way to browse only the requests for comments (or rules changes, notices...) of specific agencies in the FR as well as receive email or RSS of requests for comments. There also needs to be a link in the FR to the agency in question and not just their top level site but to the place on the site with information on the RFC and directions for how to submit comments. And lastly (this is not an FDsys comment but a general agency comment) RFCs should be submitted online.

So go ahead and submit comments for the proposed data collections below, I dare you.

• Census Bureau
  Quarterly Financial Report (February 9, 2009)
  Survey of Local Government Finances (School Systems) (March 13, 2009)
• Office of Management and Budget
  2007 North American Industry Classification System (NAICS)-Updates for 2012 (April 7, 2009)
• Bureau of Labor Statistics
  Labor Market Information (LMI) Cooperative Agreement (March 3, 2009)
• Employment and Training Administration, Department of Labor
  O*Net Data Collection Program (January 30, 2009)
• Science Resources Statistics, National Science Foundation
  Survey of Research and Development Expenditures at Universities and Colleges (March 10, 2009)
• National Institutes of Health
  Information Program on Clinical Trials: Maintaining a Registry and Results Databank (February 5, 2009)
• Administration for Children and Families, Department of Health and Human Services
  Feasibility Test for Design Phase of National Study of Child Care Supply and Demand (February 5, 2009)
• Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Department of Health and Human Services
  The AHRQ Data Inventory (January 30, 2009)
• Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Department of Health and Human Services
  CAHPS Home Health Care Survey (March 10, 2009)
• Surface Transportation Board, Department of Transportation
  Class I Railroad Annual Report (February 9, 2009)
  Quarterly Report of Freight Commodity Statistics (February 9, 2009)

About 75 people so far have volunteered to provide feedback for GPO's new Content Management System, the Federal Digital System (FDsys) -- testing is open until 1/12/09, there's still time to volunteer by emailing pmo@gpo.gov. We want to thank GPO for the opportunity to kick the tires of FDsys. In the interest of open and public discussion of this very important development in Federal information access infrastructure, we thought we'd share our feedback. GPO has posted its FDSys release phases, and we're happy to see many (but not all) of the enhancements/improvements listed that we suggest in our feedback.

Please see scribd where we've posted our feedback. We have some individual comments below.

There's been a little chatter on govdoc-l, and while we agree with some of that feedback (faceted search for example), we want so much more from FDsys that it ultimately leaves us wanting for late 2009.

[JRJ] Sure, it works, but I want it to work *well*, not only for individual/casual users, but for those thinking about building other services (shoutout to the Open House Project!), or surreptitiously finding links to docs in search engine results for those that don't know that fdsys exists etc. Also, it's unclear if fdsys exposes all the content so that others (e.g. google) can index it and, if so, how (e.g. google sitemaps, OAI, html, etc...).

[RB]- While some features of FDSys Beta are truly commendable (i.e. faceted search), it is lacking many features that would make this a more robust, user-friendly, and outstanding database. For one, where is the link to “Find it in a Library”? They have a link to “Purchase Your Own Copy” at the GPO Bookstore, but there is no way to locate the document in a library? That is inexcusable, in my opinion. Also, it lacks any type of sharing capability (i.e. social bookmarking) and RSS alert features for search queries. Oh…and no API!

With that said, I realize this is Beta and perhaps these features will roll out in later versions. But we need to remind them to include these features! If no one says anything, it might never happen. There is always room for improvement. Let’s not settle for less.

[JAJ] To me, it seemed very cluttered and complex and 'librarianish.' much more like a proquest or lexisnexis interface than a google. there is always a trade off between ease-of-use and flexibility, but, as we have seen with the success and popularity of google, it is probably wise to have a default easy-to-use interface that works for most people most of the time and keep the bells and whistles available to those who request 'advanced search.' the clutter makes me think they were trying really hard to make it look up-to-date and that just reminds me of microsoft's live.com which tries hard, but doesn't work as well as google. we don't need flash, we need simple functionality.

I think everyone responsible for FDsys needs a huge "thank you" for the progress that the release of FDsys represents. The WAIS system is so out of date that it is embarrassing; FDsys is designed to be OAIS compliant and that is a huge improvement for long term functionality and flexibility. That said, it still has a long way to go to even begin to match the functionality of current day web apps. Enhancements are coming throughout 2009 and we're excited about this first step for a child that will grow to adulthood quickly.

FDsys beta feedback - Jacobs

FDSys Beta Feedback Form

FDsys Feedback Cornwall

Check out the search demonstrations of GPO's FDsys (nee Future Digital System). GPO's Federal Digital System (FDsys) will "manage federal govt documents, allow them to be uploaded, accessed via the internet, included in the depository library program (italics added!), and preserved for the future." The video images are a bit fuzzy, but you can see that the basic utility of FDsys from an end-user's perspective is getting close to full functionality. I'm most interested in APIs and other tools and services for exporting large chunks of data and associated metadata for reuse, digital deposit into library repositories/LOCKSS caches etc and generally being able to expand on access, preservation and long-term sustainability. Hopefully, future video demonstrations will elaborate on those possibilities.

• part 1: simple search
• part 2: advanced search
• part 3: citation search
• part 4: boolean search
• part 5 is mentioned in part 4, but there's no video available as of 11/28/08 from GPO's youtube page.

Questions and comments should be emailed to pmo AT gpo DOT gov. Also feel free to leave comments here as well.

The first public release of GPO’s Federal Digital System (FDsys) http://www.gpo.gov/projects/fdsys.htm will launch later this year. Staff in the Superintendent of Documents Library Services and Content Management unit at GPO have been working with GPO's Program Management Office who are responsible for developing this system. We want to ensure that the requirements for the Federal Depository Library Program will be met.

In order to ensure that we are accurately communicating the requirements capabilities of the system, we are requesting your feedback. Based on your knowledge of FDsys, what are your expectations for the first public release? We want to make sure we continue to get this information in the hands of the development team and keep lines of communications open. Additional information should be also be shared with GPO's Program Management Office at pmo@gpo.gov

Bill Sleeman, chair of the ALA Government Documents Roundtable (GODORT), recently posted the minutes to the GPO / GODORT Steering Conference Call of March 12, 2008. These conference calls take place from time to time and often have news of value. The minutes can be found (may have to scroll) at http://wikis.ala.org/godort/index.php/GODORT_Chair and covered the following topics, among others:

• Request for Information for Mass Digitization Opportunities
• Status of EPA Web Harvesting
• Status of the Federal Digital System (FDSys)
• Addition of pre-1976 cataloging to the Catalog of Government Publications - in progress.
• Continued distance ed through OPAL
• Current stats on the newish Government Information Online reference service.

If I were you, I'd look over the entire set of minutes as it was all interesting. I'd like to highlight two issues, both of which cry out for the documents community to do more to support GPO in some of its efforts:

EPA Web Harvest Project

Here are the notes on this subject (full names available from minutes page):

LH & RHM: Status of EPA harvesting project: GPO worked through 300 of the documents to gather information on what it will take for GPO to provide access to harvested materials (process, workflow and staffing implications). So far: the back end automation of meta-data extraction is not ready; parameters for metadata that accompanies the files needs improvement to automate de-duping; and the rules, methods and mechanisms for harvesting need to be refined (approximately 28% of material was not in scope). Basically, it is still taking more staff time to make these available than GPO can afford. BS asked about the FGI taxonomy experiment and if GPO would be investigating the results of that effort. GPO may incorporate that information into the project as the project moves forward.

GPO's results of automated harvesting finding a lot of out of scope material and difficult automated extraction of metadata are about what I expected based on my own experience and from my reading of the literature. Whether or not GPO builds on our modest taxonomy experiment (Thanks Bill!), I think that a GPO - community/citizen collaboration will be needed to begin getting a handle on web-based agency documents. They could start simply by publishing their spidering logs and see what happens. Or perhaps they can obtain some of the $2 Billion/week currently being spent elsewhere. If GPO choose to take the mass collaboration route, I hope the documents community is in the forefront of helping them.

If you're interested in taking part in our tagging experiment, please see http://freegovinfo.info/epatagging. We will be running the project through April 18, 2008. To see what has been tagged so far, please visit http://del.icio.us/tag/epapilotproject.

OPAL Training

Here are the notes on this subject:

LC: OPAL, GPO continues to use OPAL for online training and demos. At present, technical capabilities limit presentations to slide shows, such as PowerPoint presentations. Interactive web functions will be added in the future. January call for participation in creation of tutorials netted one submission; hoping to generate interest at DLC.

The FDLP has over 1200 libraries and GPO got ONE SUBMISSION? A majority of FDLP libraries are teaching oriented academic libraries and GPO got ONE SUBMISSION?

Hello! I know I'm not the only one who has insisted that GPO provide training between conferences for those of us who don't get out much. The documents community has a great reservoir of government information expertise. We should be actively aiding GPO in their efforts to spread that expertise.

I admit that GPO's one submission wasn't from my library. I have a pretty new docs staff that's still getting up to speed. But that can't be the case everywhere. If only 10% of FDLP libraries could step up with a program, that would still be 120 programs -- twice a week for a whole year.

Just so I can at least pretend to put my money (or staff time) where my mouth is, I will spend some time next month looking at our library's gov info information strengths, our customer needs and patron interests. And then sometime during the summer I or someone else from our library will submit a program. If you run a depository, will you commit to doing the same? Not only does GPO need our help, so do our colleagues.

FGI thanks the GODORT and GPO personnel who participated, Jill Vassilakos-Long for taking the minutes and Bill for posting them to the ALA GODORT Wiki.

The Government Printing Office released two videos demonstrating the "Proof of Concept" release of the Federal Digital System (FDSys):

Search - 3:22

Submission - 9:21

The videos require Windows Media Player to view and one of our volunteers was unable to view the videos using his Mac version of WMV. But I did get a look.

Everything below is subject to GPO's own caveat that this "proof of concept" version will change a lot between now and the first public release in late 2008.

I was impressed with the search functionality. The search box is simple with few options, but navigation boxes on the right hand side of the screen allow one to quickly zero in on likely documents. Search results may also be sorted by title, relevance, type of resource and date issued. Individual records have links to the content, preservation metadata and more.

The only problem I had with the search was the fact the search defaults to "OR". GPO itself now understands that is a problem based on beta user input and the video narrator promised this would be fixed in the public release. I have to admit that I don't understand how anyone in the age of Google would have made a default "OR" to begin with. But what's important is that the problem is being fixed.

The Submission section of FDSys will not be available to the public, but is interesting to watch the demo to see what is involved with document creation. Currently the ability to add metadata does not include keywords, which is something I hope will be included in the official release. Given GPO's move towards brief records under some circumstances, it would be very helpful to have agency generated keywords in FDSys.

There is some information in the agency submission side of FDSys that I hope carries over to either the public side or at least for FDLP librarians. FDSys requires an agency contact for every document. It would be helpful to librarians to a contact for documents in case something goes out of print or if a user had in-depth questions about the content of a given document.

Overall, this looks like a promising start. No mention of the alert features and push delivery slated for future releases, but hopefully those will be demoed soon.