In the GPO Update offered at the Spring 2006 Depository Library Council meeting, an update of the biennial survey was offered that included new data on questions 65 & 66, better known as the "digital deposit" questions. As of March 13, 2006, 1,214 libraries have responded as follows [Number of libraries is my calculation] and was not reported by GPO:

65: My library systematically downloads, stores online publications identified from GPO Access or through GPO-created PURLS, and makes them accessible to the general public from local servers. This past year my library downloaded the following number of digital publication files (this does not include shipping lists, Web pages, or datasets): Percentage of tabulated responses / number of libraries: 0 81.06% 1-25 10.91% / 132 26-100 3.05% / 37 101-500 3.53% / 42 501-1000 0.64% / 8 1001-5000 0.80% / 10 More than 5000 0.00% 66. My library is willing to receive Federal digital publication files on deposit from GPO, store them, and make the accessible to the general public from local servers. My library is willing to receive the following number of digital publication files per year (this does not include shipping lists, Web pages, or databases): Percentage of tabulated responses / number of libraries: 0 72.52% 1-25 15.31% / 186 26-100 4.77% / 58 101-500 3.25% / 39 501-1000 1.93% / 23 1001-5000 1.12% / 14 More than 5000 1.12% / 14

Since GPO only reported percentages and since SuDoc Judy Russell did not bring up this topic in her prepared remarks, I assume that the take home message from GPO is something like, "libraries don't want to maintain local digital collections, get over it." If you look at the raw numbers of libraries responding to this survey, a different picture emerges. I cannot deny that in the absence of any distribution mechanism from GPO, most depository libraries neither locally store and serve electronic documents nor plan to do so in the future. However, even in the absence of such a mechanism, 229 libraries are ALREADY locally storing and serving federal electronic documents. 334 libraries are willing to take at least some federal electronic documents without knowning what the distribution mechanism might be. In short, we have hundreds of libraries with existing local collections of federal digital documents and accompanying expertise and hundreds of libraries willing to rise to the challenge if only they had a distribution channel. This is a testbed that GPO shouldn't dismiss so lightly. If they were more willing to work with these groups of libraries to demonstrate the feasibility of digital deposit, others would follow. Continue reading →

Continue Reading →

I believe the Government Printing Office (GPO) has broken a new speed record for posting official Council proceedings. All of the handouts, presentations, and speeches for Spring Council were posted to the proceedings web site yesterday, just two weeks and two days after the closing of Council. Everything except the remarks of keynote speaker Joe Janes, but he probably did not speak from prepared remarks. GPO should be commended for this timely posting of Council items. Continue reading →

Continue Reading →

While the heart attack, coma and subsequent death of my mother sent me to Los Angeles instead to the Spring DLC meeting in Seattle, I was fortunate to meet with a librarian who did attend the Depository Library Council meeting. In addition to talking with this librarian, I got to review the librarian's notes and make copies of handouts, most of which can be found inside the 72 page council handout, which I want to commend GPO for posting in a timely fashion. Over the next week or so, I'm going to write about what I heard and read. Bear in mind this is second hand, except for the handouts. If you have any first hand notes, please send them to admin AT freegovinfo or comment on these entries. Today I want to express my disappointment over the handout and presumably session on "Transition to a Mostly Electronic FDLP collection." This handout is on pages 47-52 of the council handout. I'm disappointed because the Council Briefing Topic makes it clear that GPO STILL believes that one can be a depository without deposits. The entire four page document only talks in terms of linking to library-external gov't resources. Doing so is a good idea and provides a public service, but it is not being a depository in the sense of having physical custody (though not ownership) of publications. Linking to external resources does not protect the end user from information disappearing or being quietly reclassified. It doesn't help them when the 'net goes down. A library that only links to external resources cannot operate independently if something bad (terror attack, killer hurricane, etc) happens to the servers providing the information. You can have decent government information service certers without deposit, but you can't have the century and a half worth of depository protection without deposit. If our society doesn't want dispersed information storage anymore, we shouldn't confuse people by implying that we have that by calling non-collections "depositories." UPDATE 4/22/2006 - GPO has posted what looks to be complete proceedings. This is a better link for the Electronic Depository document discussed above. There is also a "tips" document on how to "build" an "electronic collection" that makes no mention of building local digital collections. It's just advice on getting rid of locally owned copies in favor of links to external resources. Continue reading →

Continue Reading →

Although not directly related to government information, I'd like FGI readers to make note of the File Formats Blog available at http://fileformats.blogspot.com/. This blog is written by Harvard software engineer Gary McGath and provides "News and comments about technical issues relating to file formats, file validation, and archival software." Recent entries have included how third party fonts might jeopardize the successful preservation of PDF documents. Highlighed by the latest issue of RLG DigiNews, this blog is good reading for people concerned about digital preservation, and I hope the contractors working on the Government Printing Office's Future Digital System pay attention to it. Continue reading →

Continue Reading →