Paste your Google Webmaster Tools verification code here

Home » post » 200704171530 FDLP-DLC GPO OPEN FORUM

Our mission

Free Government Information (FGI) is a place for initiating dialogue and building consensus among the various players (libraries, government agencies, non-profit organizations, researchers, journalists, etc.) who have a stake in the preservation of and perpetual free access to government information. FGI promotes free government information through collaboration, education, advocacy and research.


Unofficial Transcript of unofficial audio session provided by James Staub. Non-anonymous corrections are welcome.


BS MP cannot be here, so GS will be facilitating as incoming Chair, pinch-hitting

1533 GS this is your chance to ask about anything

1534 Sandy M, UKY – issue 4 under digital distribution – depositories, specifically the regionals, do have a preservation mandate. Regionals are required to do preservation in the new handbook
CE SM is correct.

1535 George Carlson, Santa Claire University – pushing to non-FDLP could maybe be set up through sales
TedP the capability is there, and I appreciate the carrot approach

1537 David S, CA state library – digital deposit – I see nothing in this paper about access to deposited digital content. There were analogies made to the tangible world and title 44 this morning, but the big responsibility should be provision of access. Are we talking about a safety net for preservation instead?
CE re: access – the foundation of Title 44 is access.
DS my access question: if you imagine the FDSys as fully functional, would a library with digital deposit have to provide access to files under their custody if users could have access to exactly the same content through FDSys
CE yes. Under title 44.
DS even if exactly the same content is available under FDSys?
TB …
DS when I think of the number of docs retrieved from EPA harvest pilot, I think of uncontrolled documents streaming into depositories unorganized – how will depositories provide access to the files on their servers when FDSys will have an evolved search and retrieval interface
TB perhaps a depository will not determine that FDSys does not meet their search and retrieval needs
RD need for redundancy is important – you should not necessarily trust the GPO. This redundancy is important.
AM when we talk digital deposit, we talk about two types of files – the access copy, like a pdf, and the preservation master copy in a more raw format. To me, the current equivalent would be, yes, you have to provide access to the deposited materials.
PH ok i have the files, now what do i do with it? That’s the question
AM I’ve got the box of books – do I SuDoc or Dewey
PH will GPO provide tools for search
AM we’ve historically gotten the print things, and it’s been our responsibility to – I pay for cataloging, for processing. The administrative costs will be different

1547 Pat Ragens, U NV Reno – what is the advantage to remaining a depository – and what is the advantage to a library’s users?
TB the key differentiation – at this point we’re not sculpting digital deposit is a requirement, but an option. Every service we provide with the FDSys has a cost, and we want to make sure that the services we offer are the right ones.
PR I think it’s important that this be articulated clearly – reundancy is necessary but not at the level of 1400 depositories
RA to think that the same rules that apply today will apply 6 years from now is wrongheaded. PR mentioned staff expertise – this is our main point and what we continue to bring to the table.
GS we have not yet solved the regional issue w/r/t digital deposit. If it is a voluntary program – I can see reuse of materials, e.g., Missouri river flooding project we’re working on now.

1552 AM FDSys presentation slide on search left side blue band list of links – I thought FDSys was going to subsume GPO Access. I have a bee in my bonnet about GPO Access and the archive of DLC minutes.
LL links on the left are strictly for release 1B only.
AM when will subsume happen?

1555 KS FDSys will not include numeric data?
Celine DeLucky we have been concentrating on publications – the final published versions.
KS that’s a no
CD that’s the current scope for the current release. It doesn’t exclude this format in the future
KS I sense a desire to keep the FDLP going on. The big carrot at this point is push. I think the most valuable stuff you can push is data.
TB could you define data?
KS could be something you define as a publication, e.g., CPI.
PH NTIS and DTIC data
American Comnunity Survey
XX Notre Dame – a lot od census stuff. There are definable data sets. They are not growing or changing, but presented as published.
AM bureau of economic analysis page, census bureau page publications, these are the kinds of things, USGS material, water data. Data are our life. The answer has got to be yes and soon
XX UKansas there are 2 things that need to happen. The stuff needs to come. Publication – someone else is telling me the outcome. Data – I can define the question
Amy West – something about tangible CDROM titles and something else
1602 Jeff Bullington, U Kansas – OMB manual of statistical programs of the US Govt to id areas and publications. 5.5 billion dollars a year = important.
CE there is a precedence for having numeric data in the FDLP via CDROM. Numeric data should be in the scope of the FDLP.

Loise Trek Gangler, U Co Denver? Once in FDSys, will docs be crawled by popular search engines?
TB yes, unequivocally

1604 Mary Martin, Clairemont – assumption GPO would determine what was not in the scope of FDLP from harvesting – how will GPO do this? If you have a technology, will you put it on the front end to keep from harvesting out-of-scope documents? User needs: data files, legislative documents… for docs broken into several files, will GPO be recomposing them into a single publication?
KB harvest pilot had 3 different crawls so we could tweak the crawl rules to better capture. We’re using old FDLP scope definition – public interest, education. …moving the bottleneck from discovery to description… we have used similarities to help harvesting
RD. in many ways harvesting is a technology in its infancy. When you try to apply human scope, you get…
GS we are in the midst of a fundamental transformation of what a publication means. We are thinking of journals in terms of articles. That may or may not require another look at Title 44 – or what a publication means
RD that’s one of the things we are taking a fresh look at – how we define a publication in Title 44. Putting the pieces back together and defining a pulication
PH we would receive publications with links to datasets – ultimately data globs. You can collect all this information, but how are you going to effectively deliver it? GPO should focus on delivering publications, with data collection coming a little later. Otherwise, dispersed focus leads to failure.
CE we also need to look at how our agencies define publication – and this comes from OMB.
GS time for one more question…
1614 [her again], Colorado College – what areas of training is GPO considering? I started in my career focused on reference, but am now focused on tech services. I can get basic training, but specialized training, e.g., Map cataloging, is hard to come by.
Lance X, we’re open to suggestions for what the community wants and needs

1616 Dan , NM? I appreciate that the GPO staff is all here – do you guys have a village people chorus you could do for us?
We all agree that redefinition is necessary in Title 44, and we need to plead before Congress, and we’re here to help you with this
RD this is a great team to work with. I believe in transparency. As we pursue partnerships, we keep council informed. Similar evolution in Title 44 language.
Thanks to John Shuler et al for GIO presentation yesterday. We are interested in pursuing this.

slide title DLC Recommendations and priorities
Vision doc did not have an action plan. We are close to embarking on that. We are making recommendations now to GPO. GPO has a lot of worthwhile initiatives now, and we would like to offer recommended priorities.
There is reality underlying this – GPO is working under a continuing budget, and thank GPO for continuing to ask the hill for increased funding.
I do not want to see this list as a long term priority list – perhaps through FY 2008. We still live with the implications of priority cataloging today

1623 GS slide intro
1623 slide recommendation 1
expedite development of FDSys, including incorporation of content on WAIS platform. Rapidly.
AM this is the key – and we’ve been hearing this from GPO. I’ve been hearing that GPO would move off WAIS since 2001 and I’m not happy and I think I need to say that. This is a system essential to our democracy. It has to be done, and done as soon as reasonably possible.
Mary Barton?, University of Clairemont Colleges – if GPO Access is to be moved to FDSys… CFR, US Code are currently available through GPO Access – how would we expect CFR to appear on the new system. We depend on it being constantly updated – how would that work?
KarenS wrt CFR – we have eCFR…
M? [I just don’t get her questions…] paper CFR updated once a year…
KS all WAIS data will be available in FDSys – we’ve been migrating everything into xml/pdf format. [something] not a part of the original scope of the system…

1631 Larry Meyer, San Bernadino, version control and authentication should take care of Mary’s concern. In our field it is important to know what the CFR state was two years ago and not just the current version

1632 Beth F, Northwestern University – expediting trusted digital repository status doesn’t happen through RLG/OCLC

EF [Council sitting between AM and DD, ALA]: GPO should build toward trusted digital repository, but the specific certification will require a commitment. If FDSys will not be built to be this, what will take this function? Will GPO contract that out to a third party?

1635 AM law community – can you give me a sentence on authentication and version control to put in this recommendation?

1635 GS BF makes a good point – we might want to break this certification out
EF …

1636 slide recommendation #2
GPO review current projects and initiatives with the goal of seamless integration…

1636 slide recommendation #3
GPO harvest web-based documents

1637 slide recommendation #4
GPO establish a registry of depository librarians who are experts in specific parts or functions…
WW grand bargain – govt printed info, libraries disseminated publications. Now both ends of that bargain are falling apart thanks to electronic distribution. GPO is less dependent on FDLP to disseminate publications, but there is still great value in the program libraries. There is not an evident grand bargain – new – to sign into, but there is something to take us forward. As a manager, I would be happy to have a specialist whose relationship with the national opened up a field of other specialists.
TB we need to look at the definition of expert – self-declared, by committee?
WW selected by depository libraries themselves. That would be the first cut, open to revisions.
BS there’s also the expertise of the collections – I wouldn’t want to make the definition so narrow as to threaten the creation of the network
LH new directory will include special collections field, and we can add a special expertise field.
BS another example – cataloging expertise
GS our definition of expert is being challenged in the world of the Web. Our definition is an important question – perhaps use Web 2.0 references
AM browse topics can be used to identify community members – and web 2.0 potential in browse topics – also hopefully integrate these
??, ? University – agrees with BS – not just subject expertise
?? U TX Arlington – what does this directory look like?
GS the devil’s in the details. Something that needs to be fleshed out
WW plenty of room for experts of all kinds

1647 recommendation #5 GPO coordinate and support item level cataloging of digitized works…
PH GPO needs to work hard with partners to get this done. I view GPO as tool provider, like wikipedia, except GPO would certify their contributors.
[includes retrospective cataloging bullet]

1649 recommendation #6 GPO partner with libraries and other institutions on digitization projects…
PH important for GPO market to agencies and certified partners the standards/specifications.

1650 recommendation #7 GPO provide an online venue for collaboration, etc…

1651 recommendation #8 GPO focus on specific DIGITIZATION projects requiring unique treatments…

1651 recommendation #9 GPO evaluate any assessment proposals…
KS this can’t happen alone – FDLP must pitch in to each recommendation. That’s our new bargain. And in the process, we get new expertise and recognition as leaders. This is a partnership.
WW common theme – they are all recommendations of the era of electronic information exchange, and each creates a new modelg for GPO/FDLP relationship

1654 KB #9 clarification, please
BS the old assessment programs focused on collections and not services. We agree that there has to be that relationship between the handbook and the assessment, but there’s a lot of expertise that does not get assessed
?? Ukansas – it’s important to know when the requirements facilitate service.
KB I’ll take this into tomorrow’s presentation on assessment
AM I was also thinking about including these assessments into our other assessments of service at the library. These are the things I need to be encouraged to think about – not how many pieces of paper I’ve processed.
RD thanks to council for the recommendations – we have found them valuable in the past, and believe they will be useful to us now. I believe that they are achievable. AM’s comment about GPO talking without delivering – this team believes in transparency and doing what we say we will do – or at least let you know we can’t.

1659 GS this is a living document. Please provide input.

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.