Home » post » 200510191030 – Depository Library Council – Plenary Session with Public Printer of US part 2

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.

200510191030 – Depository Library Council – Plenary Session with Public Printer of US part 2

Download an audio file of this session

A helpful list of abbreviations for personal names used in this posting

0:00:15 MP: Law libraries want paper because the issuing agencies recognize paper as the only official version.

0:00:50 DA: Horse and buggy, paper and electronic.

0:02:25 MS: Publishers anguish over the loss of control of content as libraries seek to customize it. We want platform-neutral content.

0:05:10 BJ: responds. Carnegie-Mellon is developing automated language translation. We need to work with big agencies to help them prepare documents in a fashion that will produce accurate automated translations.

0:07:00 CM: asks for an update on the mass digitization of the legacy collection.
BJ: …
70% of the FDLP collection will be online by the end of 2007.
We need to determine what other documents need to go into the collection. E.g, the Federalist Papers are not FDLP, but are undeniably important.

0:12:00 BJ: The strategic vision describes two new working groups that are still too new. The following discussion centers around staff development at GPO.

0:13:50 BJ: Nothing in this world is free.

0:14:40 BJ: “commercially viable.”

0:15:33 CM: lauds BJ’s professional development opportunities for staff. We on Council have heard much need for librarians for professional development.

0:17:25 JG: quotes BJ that our biggest asset is expertise.

0:18:25 BJ: Educational training is the first thing to get cut from organizational budgets in tough times.
Recounts expanding and contracting GPO educational funding levels.
When the library community clamors for more printed pieces, education suffers.

0:23:00 WS: Back to BJ’s challenge – BJ, do you see that we are on track?

0:23:50 BJ: “Do I like the way the sausage is being made here?”
It’s sloppy right now. The pieces need to be put together in a cogent way. Still, he sees enormous progress.
The process will probably not be completed according to BS’s aggressive timeline.

0:25:50 BS: requests questions from the audience
0:26:00 Linda Fredericks: King County Library System: Performed customer experience transformation project to which the first response was to please change “customer” to “patron.” Patrons apparently have taken to heart the ideals of public support, ownership, and the third place model.

0:28:45 [University of Kentucky]: Hopes that consultant proposals will be back on the table.

0:29:20 [Oklahoma State University]: User groups don’t necessarily need an electronic analogy for paper products, but instead an electronic document that exploits the advantages of its digital format.
BJ: You hit the nail on the head.

0:31:25 [Notre Dame University]: The visioning process has been excellent in documenting our input, but the cost-benefit analysis isn’t done yet [?]. Congress needs to hear that they are now abusing the program.
JR often notes that one size doesn’t fit all. The community has sent a clear answer that one size doesn’t fit all with regard to essential print titles.
BJ: It is good to be concerned about the shift of balance between the costs and benefits of program participation to depository libraries. How do we re-establish the balance?
[Notre Dame University]: responds that we need to go to our congressional members and let them know what’s up.
BJ: let’s get our story straight on Title 44 first so that we aren’t telling them two or more different things.
More on the essential titles list.
GPO did not present the Print on Demand program well.
Glad to hear that the community is willing to listen to print on demand proposals again.
Notes that the GPO had not thought through the Print on Demand allowances that would lead to purchasing free government information.
The community and Congress need to take time to ingest and think through the possibilities.

0:39:45 Kevin Reynolds, University of the South: How tied is the GPO strategic plan to the effective sale of the old building. Is there a backup plan if the sale goes awry?
BJ: If the deal doesn’t work, we’ll leave the old building, move, and take the one-time payment.
We can’t let the renovation of the building stand in the way of our vision.
We got the money for FDSys from reprogramming funds. We will find the funds we need to get the job done from somewhere.

0:43:33 Ann Marie Sanders, Library of Michigan: The council has done a good job of summarizing the input gathered from the community. Points missing from their summary include
The National Bibliography is vital, especially the creation of records for pre-1976 items.
We need operational standards and evaluative tools to guarantee consistency of service.
The by-agency model of distribution is a 19th century solution.

0:45:40 MASS CONFUSION. BJ did not understand the suggestion for evaluation applied to depository operations and not the FDSys.

0:48:40 Confusion abates and order is restored. Kind of.
BJ still doesn’t understand but notes he will get educated.
TE: The new depository manual is being written by the community. We are working to get useful performance metrics and standards to present to our host library institutions.
WS: …

00:50:58 Julie Wallace, University of Minnesota: Will libraries still participate in legacy digitization? If so, we need to know what is being digitized with the help of legacy cataloging. Luckily, Franklin should be able to track digitization efforts through the use of MARC acquisition notes.
BJ: GPO has not settled whether it will seek library contributions of legacy digitization, but thanks the community for the expressed offers of participation.
The value of this project depends on its consistency. The most important thing is GPO authentication.
There are folks better at metadata than GPO.
GPO will say soon how the mechanics of this project will work.
[Audience Member]: Don’t be too anal about authenticity. Suggests tiered levels of authentication.
BJ: Two classes with two levels of authentication.
PH: worked on a project with similar parameters in which the source of each object was recorded.
BS: reminds Council that the GPO Authentication white paper < http://www.gpoaccess.gov/authentication/AuthenticationWhitePaperFinal.pdf >has two levels of authentication built into the standard.

1:00:35 RD: …
GS: Community digitization efforts need discussion.
We still need authenticated documents. Please, solve the authentication problem.

1:02:00 BJ: Consistency of metadata is very important. GPO doesn’t have better skills or better people than the library community, but the GPO can organize and carry through a project.

1:03:25 [University of Central Florida]: Responding to BJ comment that the nuts and bolts should be left to the GPO: the devil’s in the details.
BJ: You can’t be both the customer and the vendor. You tell GPO what you want. GPO builds that for the library community. The community then performs quality control on the product.
Most of all what GPO needs is for the library community to tell GPO clearly and concisely what they need.

1:05:46 [University of Alabama]: What is the timeline for GPO’s physical relocation?
Will there be regional libraries in 2015?
BJ: reported during an oversight hearing that the move would be complete by the end of 2007. GPO is ready to roll, but remains at the mercy of Congress.
Regional depositories in 2015 will not be as we think about them today. They might take on the character of consortia rather than individual institutions. GPO cannot build this.
GPO hasn’t pushed these issues, but is willing to put more muscle into them.

0:09:28 [University of Rhode Island]: Library directors need persuasive information to deliver to their deans and higher-ups to prove what the program is doing for their institutions.
BJ: in the last 3 years, the GPO has reached out to directors.
This messaging is essentially, though, your job.

1:14:33 Richard Akeroyd, New Mexico State Library: Elaboration on the concept of Return on Investment.
Directors need talking points to use in persuading their funders.
Please look at the Library for the Blind and Physically Handicapped for a model of depository performance evaluation.
The US Newspaper project could serve as a model for the legacy collection digitization.
BJ: spoke with the National Endowment for the Humanities.
Richard Akeroyd, New Mexico State Library: NDIIP has models for document digitization projects with state libraries and archives.
Cooperative Online Serials (CONSER) can also provide a model for collaborative efforts.
BJ: …
Michele McKnelly, University of Wisconsin – River Falls: GPO catalogers contribute to CONSER.
Recounts Clifford Lynch’s forecast that we should be able to fit the entirety of the digital depository onto a child’s toy, which scares her [I imagine because of the immoral filth the children would be exposed to].
Does GPO have a policy on depositing electronic documents?
BJ: The specifications for the FDSys harvester are already obsolete.
The procurements process is slowing things down.

1:22:30 Michele McKnelly, University of Wisconsin – River Falls: asks directly whether GPO will deposit digital surrogates.
BJ: [doesn’t answer – I think he wasn’t sure what she was asking]

1:25:20 John Stevenson, University of Delaware: BJ’s customer model might make us retailers. If so, we need to worry about the amount of product we are moving. Both the number of PURLs and catalog records for electronic titles has flattened out at a low level.
BJ: sees the same numbers. It is time-consuming to get the work done right.

1:29:20 Dan Barkley, University of New Mexico: Thank you, Council.
BJ: best DLC ever.

1:30:50 BS: WS will chair the council next October 1.
Thanks to the GPO staff, Council, and everybody.

1:33:40 BS: Adjourn.

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. Required fields are marked *

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