OCLC Print Archives Pilot Project update 2011 05-26


Published on

Slides from Webex update session (2011-05-26) on OCLC Print Archives Pilot project. Coordinating committee: Kathryn Harnish, OCLC; Constance Malpas, OCLC Research; Dennis Massie, OCLC Research; Lizanne Payne, Consultant; Emily Stambaugh, California Digital Library.

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

OCLC Print Archives Pilot Project update 2011 05-26

  1. 1. MARC 583 for Print Archives - Focus Group<br />Two scheduled meetings:<br /><ul><li>Tuesday, 5 April 2011 – noon PDT / 3:00 EDT - Recording & Slides
  2. 2. Thursday, 26 May 2011 – 10:00 PDT / 1:00 EDT</li></ul>Today’s objective: review status of working group assignments, summarize key recommendations, identify outstanding issues, discuss timeline<br />ALA attendees take note: <br /><ul><li>Saturday, 25 June 2011 – 4:00-5:30 ALCTS-CRS Holdings Update
  3. 3. Sunday, 26 June 2011 - 1:30–3:30 ALCTS session on 583 use</li></li></ul><li>Agenda<br />10:00-10:10 Introductions <br /> Constance Malpas, Program Officer, OCLC Research<br />10:10-10:20 Review of Working Group Activities<br /> Lizanne Payne, WEST Project Manager and CRL Print <br /> Archives Consultant<br />10:20-10:45 Recommendations<br /> Kathryn Harnish, Manager, OCLC Cooperative Platform <br />10:45- 11:15 Outstanding Issues <br /> Emily Stambaugh, California Digital Library Shared Print <br /> Program Manager and WEST Assistant Project Manager<br />11:15–11:30 Proposed Timetable <br /> Dennis Massie, Program Officer, OCLC Research<br />NB This WebEx session will be recorded<br />
  4. 4. New Print Archives Pilot team members<br /><ul><li>Meghan Hopkins (Product Analyst, WorldCat Collection Analysis )</li></ul>Will be providing project management during the pilot implementation phase<br /><ul><li>Dennis Massie (Program Officer, OCLC Research)</li></ul>Will be guiding resource-sharing discussions, ensuring that implications for inter-lending workflows are addressed <br />
  5. 5. Special thanks <br />Metadata working group<br /><ul><li>Linda Barnhart, UCSD
  6. 6. Colleen Carlton, UC SRLF
  7. 7. Mecheal Charbonneau, Indiana
  8. 8. Ryan Finnerty, UCSD</li></ul>Preservation working group<br /><ul><li>Kate Contakos, Stanford
  9. 9. Cathy Martyniak, Florida</li></ul>Resource-sharing working group<br /><ul><li>Chris Bourg, Stanford
  10. 10. Dennis Massie, OCLC Research
  11. 11. Vince Novoa, UC Riverside
  12. 12. Mary Grenci, Oregon
  13. 13. John Riemer, UCLA
  14. 14. Phil Schreur, Stanford
  15. 15. Amy Wood, CRL
  16. 16. Mary Miller, Minnesota
  17. 17. Jake Nadal, UCLA
  18. 18. Matthew Sheehy, Harvard
  19. 19. Vitus Tang, Stanford
  20. 20. Tin Tran, UC SRLF
  21. 21. Sherri Michaels, Indiana</li></li></ul><li>Working Group Activities<br /><ul><li>Metadata – 13 May 2011 (Payne)
  22. 22. reaffirmed recommended approach to record print archiving activities (583) in the Local Holdings Record (LHR)
  23. 23. require minimum number of 583s per record with a minimal amount of data entry
  24. 24. Resource sharing – 16 May 2011 (Massie)
  25. 25. confirmed that detailed use cases are needed to evaluate workflow impact
  26. 26. clarification needed on supplier/non-supplier status of Print Archive institution symbols; concerns about preservation value of circulating archive collections</li></li></ul><li>Working Group Activities (cont.)<br /><ul><li>Preservation – 19 May 2011 (Malpas)
  27. 27. concerns about ambiguity in ‡l =“committed to archive” as preservation commitment (is archive a verb? a noun?)
  28. 28. echoed concerns of resource-sharing group with regard to erosion of preservation guarantee if archive materials circulate
  29. 29. proposed broader consultation on adequacy of existing PDA vocabulary, focus on potential need for need $a action and ‡l status terms</li></li></ul><li>Recommendations<br /><ul><li>Establish new Print Archive institution symbol(s) to identify the library or storage facility’s print archives locations
  30. 30. Institution symbols are critical part of resource-sharing and collection-analysis infrastructure
  31. 31. Create GAC groups of Print Archive Institution Symbols to facilitate discovery in Connexion and Resource-Sharing
  32. 32. Print archiving institutions may participate in one or more GAC</li></li></ul><li>Recommendations<br /><ul><li>Create Local Holdings Record (LHR) for each archived title with 583 specifying location (Institution Symbol), print archiving program, archiving action(s), retention period, and holdings archived
  33. 33. Minimum requirement for print archiving LHR: commitment to retain expressed in $a=retained and ‡l =committed to archive [sic]
  34. 34. Up to three 583 per LHR to disclose (1) print archive commitment, (2) condition and (3) completeness
  35. 35. Validated archives will need to provide 2-3 583 per title</li></li></ul><li>Example: WEST Bronze Archive title<br />One 583 created: retention only <br />Retention 583: ‡3 v.1-v.34 (1954-1988) ‡a retained ‡c 2011-01-01 ‡d 25 years ‡f WEST ‡f WEST Bronze ‡j ORUM ‡l committed to archive ‡2 pda ‡5 OrU<br /> Registers: holdings archived, print archiving commitment, term of commitment, locationof archived content, print archive program, responsible institution<br />
  36. 36. Example: WEST Gold Archive title<br /> Three 583s created: retention, completeness, condition<br /> Retention 583: ‡3 v.1-v.50 (1951-2005) ‡a retained ‡c 2011-01-01 ‡d 25 years ‡f WEST ‡f WEST Gold ‡j ORUM ‡l committed to archive ‡2 pda ‡5 OrU<br />Completeness 583: ‡3 v.1-v.50 (1951-2005) ‡a completeness reviewed ‡c 2011-01-01 ‡f Orbis Cascade Alliance Distributed Print Repository ‡f WEST ‡f WEST Gold ‡i issue validation ‡z reprints v.3-v.5 (1951-1958) ‡z missing v.6-v.7 (1959-1960), v.17 (1970) ‡2 pda ‡5 OrU<br />Condition 583: ‡3 v.1-v.50 (1951-2005) ‡a condition reviewed ‡c 2011-01-01 ‡f WEST ‡f WEST Gold ‡i issue validation ‡z tight bindings v.30-v.35 (1973-1978) ‡z missing foldouts v. 40 (1995) ‡2 pda ‡5 OrU<br /> <br /> <br />
  37. 37. Outstanding Issues<br />Preservation<br /><ul><li>“Committed to archive” or “committed to repository” or “persistent deposit” or ?
  38. 38. Required action: consult with community of adequacy of term or propose alternative for PDA by 10 June 2011
  39. 39. Assess ‡l terms for condition and completeness review
  40. 40. Required action: map WEST validation standards to PDA terms by 10 June 2011</li></li></ul><li>Outstanding Issues<br />Metadata<br /><ul><li>Test of LHR creation
  41. 41. Required action: each pilot site to create 5 LHR with 1-3 print archive 583 statements by 22 June 2011
  42. 42. Test small and larger-scale creation and data load processes
  43. 43. Small scale: 1-5 unvalidated titles from pilot WEST Bronze archives, CIC shared print archive
  44. 44. Larger scale: condition and completeness for 5-500 validated titles from pilot WEST Silver and Gold archives</li></li></ul><li>Outstanding Issues<br />Resource sharing<br /><ul><li>Develop use cases to test resource sharing impact
  45. 45. Required action: develop detailed use cases for inter-lending (or deflection) of print archived content within and beyond WEST, CIC groups by 8 July 2011
  46. 46. Test impact of maintaining holding under two institution symbols (print archive + original institution)
  47. 47. Required action: address as specific use-case by 8 July 2011</li></li></ul><li>Proposed Timeline<br />Phase 1: Test Holdings Disclosure Features<br />By May 31: Distribute final version of proposed metadata guidelines to pilot participants<br />By June 10: <br />OCLC assigns new Institution Symbols to pilot participants<br />Finalize PDA terminology changes to ‡l (Status) as needed<br />Distribute final metadata instructions to pilot participants<br />By June 22: Participants provide sample LHR records to OCLC<br />
  48. 48. Proposed Timeline (cont.)<br />By July 8: OCLC loads/adds sample records<br />July 8 – 29: Pilot participants assess search and display functionality in Connexion<br />Phase 2: Test Resource-Sharing Features<br />By July 8: Resource sharing working group develops use cases<br />July 8 – 29: Participants test resource-sharing use cases<br />
  49. 49. Summary: Implementation Actions<br />1. Establish new Print Archive institution symbol(s) to identify the library’s print archives location or collection. [OCLC]<br />2. Create GAC groups of Print Archive Institution Symbols to facilitate discovery in Connexion and Resource Sharing. A given print archiving program may belong to multiple GAC groups. [OCLC]<br />3. For validated holdings only, update the bibliographic holdings statement(s) once validation is complete (i.e. 85x/86x formatted holdings or 866 summary holdings statement).  [Archiving institution]<br />4. Create a Local Holdings Record (LHR) for each title to define location (Institution Symbol), print archiving program, archiving action(s), and holdings archived. Include one, two, or three 583 Action Notes in the LHR as appropriate. [Archiving institution]<br />
  50. 50. Proposed naming convention for PA symbols <br />
  51. 51. Recommended LHR fields for print archives<br />004 OCLC number [mandatory] or 035  OCLC number [mandatory]<br /> <br />583 Action Note<br /> <br />‡ 3 Materials specified: detailed holdings to which action applies, should be same range of holdings described in LHR 85x/86x or 866. Indicate gaps in ‡ 3 if known.<br />‡ a Action: “retained” or “completeness reviewed” “condition reviewed”. Controlled terms: PDA<br />‡ c Time/Date of Action: Date action taken<br />‡ d Action interval: when commitment expires or “persistent”<br />‡ f Authorization: Archiving program eg WEST, ASERL, CIC-SPA). <br />‡ l Status: “committed to archive” [or “committed to repository”]. Controlled terms: PDA.<br />‡ iMethod of Action: Validation level if ‡a=condition reviewed) Controlled terms: PDA.<br />‡ j Site of Action Holding Location Code (HLC)<br />‡ u Uniform Resource Identifier: Link to print archive program documentation <br />‡ z Public Note: For “completeness reviewed”, identify “missing” units or “reprints” needing replacement. For “condition reviewed”, identify condition using controlled vocabulary (TBD) followed by units to which it applies. Use one ‡ z Note per completeness status or condition.<br />‡ 5 Institution: Archiving institution, controlled terms using MARC organization code<br /> <br />852    ‡a Location (print archives Institution Symbol) ‡b Sublocation (HLC) [other subfields as needed]<br />85x/86x if available<br />866   ‡a Textual holdings (Summary holdings) if no 85x<br />
  52. 52. Resources<br />Preservation & Digitization Actions: Terminology for MARC 21 Field 583<br />http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/pda.pdf<br />Registry of Digital Masters Record Creation Guidelines<br />http://old.diglib.org/collections/reg/DigRegGuide200705.htm<br />OCLC Local Holdings Maintenance Quick Reference<br />http://www.oclc.org/support/documentation/localholdings/quickref/lhm_quickref.pdf<br />*Draft* Guidelines: MARC 583 for Print Archives<br />https://docs.google.com/a//document/pub?id=1uJliwl41W00U1BISfIuib_Cah7NvXoknf9UP6yXBw48<br />*Draft* Recommended Revisions to PDA<br />https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1WbpPOQa2Nd8NjpuNg0hdzhBIMjHeQ2c85J0AiJUswx4<br />
  53. 53. Thanks for your attention.<br />Comments and questions are welcome: <br />emily.stambaugh@ucop.edu<br />harnishk@oclc.org<br />lpayne@crl.edu<br />malpasc@oclc.org<br />massied@oclc.org<br />