Home » Posts tagged 'gpo' (Page 44)

Tag Archives: gpo

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.

GPO’s draft regional libraries report and FGI comments

A few weeks ago, the Government Printing Office released their draft report entitled, Regional Depository Libraries in the 21st Century: A Time for Change? and asked for comments until June 30. I'm not sure how many comments they received, but wanted to publish comments we submitted. Lynne Bradley, Director American Library Association Washington Office, DID submit comments that were endorsed by the Association of College & Research Libraries (ACRL), the Association for Library Collections & Technical Services (ALCTS), and the Government Documents Roundtable (GODORT). GODORT republished Ms. Bradley's letter on their wiki. While we are in general agreement with ALA's letter calling for increased flexibility of Title 44 (*not* wholesale changes in the title) and increased appropriations for GPO initiatives and "regional depository libraries to help offset the costs of storing and preserving government property," our comments deal with the more philosophical issues embedded in the draft report. Please let us know what you think.

I. Delete from the report all uses of the adjective "legacy" when referring to collections. The use of the word "legacy" as an adjective comes from computer science and is used to indicate things that are "outdated" and "undesirable." When the report uses the phrase "legacy collections" it implies that it is referring to unwanted and outdated collections. (The report uses "legacy" as an adjective in only one other context: in its reference to sections 1911 and 1912 of Title 44 USC as "Legacy Sections" -- apparently in order to define these section as out of date and undesirable.) Thus, the use of the phrase "legacy collections" is either inaccurate and misleading, or imprecise. In its place GPO should use phrases that accurately describe the collections it wishes to discuss. For example, in place of "legacy collections" the report could uses phrases such as "collections without adequate bibliographic records" or "collections of print materials" or "collections without digital equivalents" or other phrases that accurately describe the collections GPO is referring to. If GPO does wish to refer to unwanted out of date materials it should describe them that way explicitly rather than use the term "legacy." II. The report should more explicitly and accurately address the difference between roles and responsibilities that are legally mandated and those that have been assumed without a legal mandate. Specifically, we object to the following sentences of the report (Section V.B. pages 16-17) that gloss over these differences. (These sentences refer to Public Law 103-40, The Government Printing Office Electronic Information Access Enhancement Act of 1993.)
The implementation of the GPO Access Act ushered GPO into the online age and accelerated the paradigm shift in the FDLP that changed GPO’s relationship with depository libraries. Regional depositories have the responsibility for permanent public access in the tangible publication environment. In the online information environment GPO has assumed primary responsibility for ensuring content and permanent public access. [emphasis added]
We suggest the following wording instead:
While the GPO Access Act specifically required GPO to "provide a system of online access" and to "operate an electronic storage facility for Federal electronic information," it did not specify any change in the roles of the depository libraries. It added new roles for GPO, but did not reduce, alter, or delete the roles of depository libraries. Since 1993, Congress has consistently provided funds to GPO for the "distribution" of government publications to designated depository libraries. This wording was carefully chosen. In 2000 the House attempted to substitute the wording "on-line access" for "distribution," but that language was rejected. Nevertheless, GPO has chosen to implement this law in a way that is shifting the relationship between GPO and depository libraries. GPO has chosen to assume responsibility for permanent public access to digital materials and has chosen not to offer digital deposit as an option to FDLP libraries. This has resulted in a paradigm shift in access, preservation, and service within the FDLP. Instead of relying on FDLP libraries and their different locations, funding, and technological infrastructures, GPO has chosen to implement policies a) that do not "distribute" digital objects to FDLP libraries, b) that make it difficult for FDLP libraries to build local digital collections, and c) that create a preservation system that depends on a single centralized collection with a single funding source. While these choices seemed appropriate 15 years ago, much has changed over the years. Many libraries are developing institutional repositories and other digital collections. In a survey in August of 2005, 85% of responding FDLP libraries expressed "high" or "very high" interest in being able to "pull" content from GPO and 65% were equally interested in GPO "pushing" digital content to FDLP libraries. In the current survey of Regionals, 52% expressed a willingness to receive digital files on deposit. Commercial and open source software for managing digital collections is now widely available. As we look at new models and roles for FDLP libraries, we need to consider true digital deposit as a viable and important option. We need to look beyond the now-old model of relying solely on GPO having primary responsibility for ensuring content and permanent public access.
Continue reading

Continue Reading →

EPA Tagging Results – Ready and Promising

Our report on our experiment in using del.icio.us to tag EPA documents originally harvested by GPO is now completed and available for your review and comment at http://freegovinfo.info/node/1825. For more information about this project, including a list of tags assigned to documents by project participants, please see http://freegovinfo.info/epatagging. Our thanks to the project participants! Continue reading

Continue Reading →

EPA Tagging Results and Future Directions

Back in January we asked people to use del.icio.us to tag a sample of 32 documents taken from the 100 EPA documents posted by the Government Printing Office (GPO) to http://www.gpoaccess.gov/harvesting/index.html. We asked people to tag documents from 1/18/2008 through /18/2008. A spreadsheet of the results is available at http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pybymZBlZ80PVat2ggty2GA. This brief article informally discusses some of our results, offers some lessons learned, and offers suggestions for future projects. Finally, a short list of articles on other research relating to tagging is presented. 1) Findings

  • Number of tagged documents - 31
  • Average number of people tagging a given document - 2.5
  • Highest number of taggers for a document - 8, for the document "Environmental Results Under EPA Assistance Agreements"
  • Average number of deduplicated tags per document - 11.25
  • Number of documents with descriptions - 31, with a majority of documents having more than one human generated description.
2) Some Promising Results While we would have liked to have seen more participation (see below under "study limitations"), these initial results are somewhat positive. There is some interest in tagging. Tagged documents tended to receive meaningful descriptions beyond what a brief bibliographic record would provide. For example, for the document "Air Sealing: Building Envelope Improvements", we have the following descriptions from five users:
* Mount Desert Spring Water was able to win a bid to provide bottled water and water coolers to the University of Maine. Mount Desert Spring Water was successful because the water coolers it provided were energy efficient and the lowest cost to the Universi - samchap * Describes the benefits of proper air sealing for homes. EPA awards the EnergyStar when legal minimum standards are exceeded. - mkvs * Conserving energy in your house by having it sealed correctly - bookswoman * "Air sealing the building envelope is one of the most critical features of an energy efficient home." "25-40% of energy" "ENERGY STAR qualified homes, constructed to exceed [building] codes with air sealing, can offer a better quality product." - keyvowel * This Energy Star news release describes ways homeowners can reduce home heating and cooling costs by implementing air sealing techniques. - tadamich
Without question, the first description is problematic, but the other four descriptions are in agreement about what this document is about AND provide more relevant information than a brief bibliographic record. For the most part, the tags we got were also meaningful and descriptive. Staying with the document "Air Sealing", we have the following tags:
Air, air-sealing, airsealing, building-insulation, efficient, energy, energy-efficiency, Energy-Star-Branding, energyconservation, energystar, epa, EPA-advertising, globalwarming, greenhousegases, home-building, home-building-techniques, home-construction, home-improvement, homes, hvac, indoor, leakage, money-saving, quality, sealing, ventilation
Contrast that with a brief bibliographic record that simply has title, agency, and URL. How would people know that this document is part of the EnergyStar initiative, or that it was related to home building or energy efficiency? Clearly, in this instance and in a number of other project documents, there was a clear value added. 3) Limitations of current study Our promising results were limited by three factors, the most important was the lack of participation. We estimate that about ten people participated in our tagging project. The available research on tagging is pretty firm on stating that good social tagging requires many users. Some say 100 or so is good, others suggest higher numbers. Our numbers are clearly too low. There are also too many instances (12) when a document was tagged by a single user. This could greatly bias how a document gets tagged. Consider if the only description of "Air Sealing" had been the mistaken one about water coolers. That would have been worse than useless. But even in this instance, a user pulling up this document while searching for water coolers could have provided a more accurate description. The low number of taggers also made it difficult to see how much tag agreement existed among the various taggers. Another problem was self-inflicted. We forgot to instruct people on tag construction. These were our original instructions:
1) Visit http://www.archive.org/search.php?query=epapilotproject and go to a document on the list. Open the pdf file in a separate browser window. 2) In del.icio.us, tag the page for the Internet Archive record (i.e. not the PDF file) after examining the PDF file. 3) In the del.icio.us "notes" field, write a one or two sentence description of what the document is about. 4) In the tags field, please use epapilotproject, for:freegovinfo and then any tags that you feel describe this document.
del.icio.us uses a space separated tag system. In other words, a space begins a new tag. So tagging something as "air quality" results in the two tags of "air" and "quality" and not the more helpful tag of "air quality" This resulted in some of the tagging becoming meaningless. If we had asked people to put dots or dashes in multiple word tags, we would have gotten more meaningful tags. We still got some useful tags because some of our taggers were used to the del.icio.us system, but we shouldn't have assumed that everyone tagging would know how to construct multiword tags in del.icio.us. On the other hand, this problem might have been less noticeable if we had more taggers per document. Our final problem is one we think could be avoided in future projects. That is people tagging different files with the same document title. We asked people to bookmark the Internet Archive page for a given document, which has a link to the PDF file. We specifically asked people NOT to tag the PDF file because del.icio.us doesn't populate the title field of bookmarked PDFs. But one person in our project consistently bookmarked a document's PDF file instead of the Internet Archive page and this separated that person's tagging from everyone else's and made it more difficult to compile tagging info for every document. 4) What next? Some suggestions Our findings indicate that tagging does have potential to add value to web harvested documents that do not receive full cataloging, but for this benefit to be fully realized, there must be more taggers. When we realized we didn't have the number of taggers we wanted, we headed for the literature and found some articles listed below under "References Consulted." They offer some interesting guidance for other document tagging efforts. While all of the papers below talked about user motivation, I think Tim Spalding said it best in a post titled "When tags work and when they don't: Amazon and LibraryThing":
"Something is going on here—something with broad implications for tagging, classification and "Web 2.0" commerce. There are a couple of lessons, but the most important is this: Tagging works well when people tag "their" stuff, but it fails when they're asked to do it to "someone else's" stuff. You can't get your customers to organize your products, unless you give them a very good incentive. We all make our beds, but nobody volunteers to fluff pillows at the local Sheraton."
The EPA documents are sort of like fluffing pillows at the local Sheraton, to me at least. My primary interest isn't environmental documents and EPA documents are not a major component of my library's depository collection. In addition our particular sample was unintentionally heavy on flyers, applications, and brochures. It could be that another agency's documents, say NASA or DoD might get more attention. There's another angle too. In my anecdotal experience, librarians don't see web stuff as theirs, so they don't spend much processing time on it. Of if they are concerned about web documents, perhaps their administration does not. So how could we make them owners and think of web harvested materials as "their stuff" so they'll make their "documents beds"? A few suggestions follow: 1) For the EPA documents, GPO could partner with libraries that do have a strong environmental collection. Perhaps candidate libraries could be determined through item selection analysis. 2) GPO might wish to consider doing a depository survey to see what agency depositories would most like to see web-harvested. The survey could include a question asking libraries if they would tag if the desired content was harvested. There wouldn't have to be a commitment to tag every document, but to tag some of the documents. While GPO should continue with web harvesting no matter what, we wouldn't blame them for not moving forward with a documents tagging initiative if the depository community failed to register interest in such a project. 3) If GPO re-harvests EPA or moves on to another agency, it should consider setting up RSS feeds for newly harvested documents. Subject specialists from inside and outside the library community could take part in tagging. Again, GPO would need to start with some broadly popular agencies to have a chance of recruiting a significant number of taggers. 4) If GPO or another organization does a large scale tagging project, significant thought should go into tagging conventions. Not the vocabulary itself -- research seems to show that once an item reaches 100 tags or so, the proportion of tags stays constant. That is to say that agreed upon terms appear to predominate over idiosyncratic or spam tags (See Golder and Huberman below for details). What needs to be spelled out is how multi-word tags should be constructed -- is it air-quality, air.quality, or air_quality? They all mean the same thing, but del.icio.us and other tagging services interpret them differently. A consistent new word marker or a choice of tagging site that supported spaces inside tags will make any tagging project go smoother. These are our thoughts. What are yours? Look at our spreadsheet. Check out the item pages on del.icio.us and read the articles below. Then let us know what you think about the future of social tagging for government documents. References Consulted - "HT06, Tagging Paper, Taxonomy, Flickr, Academic Article, ToRead" by Cameron Marlow, Mor Naaman, danah boyd, Marc Davis http://www.danah.org/papers/Hypertext2006.pdf - The Structure of Collaborative Tagging Systems by Scott A. Golder and Bernardo A. Huberman http://www.hpl.hp.com/research/idl/papers/tags/ http://www.hpl.hp.com/research/idl/papers/tags/tags.pdf - "Can Social Bookmarking Improve Web Search?" by Paul Heymann, Georgia Koutrika, and Hector Garcia-Molina http://heymann.stanford.edu/improvewebsearch.html http://dbpubs.stanford.edu/pub/showDoc.Fulltext?lang=en&doc=2008-2&format=pdf&compression=&name=2008-2.pdf - "When tags work and when they don't: Amazon and LibraryThing" Thingology Blog, posted by Tim Spalding Tuesday, February 20, 2007 http://www.librarything.com/thingology/2007/02/when-tags-works-and-when-they-dont.php Continue reading

Continue Reading →

Spring 2008 DLC Materials Now Available

I wanted to write about this a few days ago, but have only found the time to do so now. The Government Printing Office (GPO) started releasing materials from the Spring 2008 Depository Library Conference even before the DLC meeting closed on April 2, 2008. You can find their materials at http://www.fdlp.gov/repository/dlc/spring08/index.html GPO deserves credit for being prompt for the initial release of DLC materials. It is a refreshing change from a few years ago when people who couldn't make meetings had to wait many weeks for materials to be made available. So thanks GPO! I hope to go through most of this material in the near future in more detail, but here are some items that seem like they are of special interest:

  • Improved Access to EPA Information:Before and After with Web 2.0 by Brand Niemann (in 3 parts)
  • Web 2.0 Power Point Presentation by Cindy Etkin of the U.S. Government Printing Office
  • Back to the drawing board in Virtual and Real Worlds
  • Web Harvesting Update for the Depository Library Council
  • Web Scraping Government Information
Go forth and check out! Let us know what you think of what's been released. Continue reading

Continue Reading →

Spring 2008 DLC Conference March 31 – April 2 Resources Page

Official materials including handouts and some prepared speeches can be found at http://www.fdlp.gov/repository/dlc/spring08/index.html. Please feel free to send us your notes or recordings of conference sessions. Continue reading

Continue Reading →

Latest Posts

Latest Comments

Blogroll

Archives

Meta

Archives

Powered by WordPress / Academica WordPress Theme by WPZOOM