diglib: Meeting minutes, 12/4

["Mark R. Watson" <mrwatson@OREGON.UOREGON.EDU>]

DibLib:

The minutes of our first meeting are provided
below.  The Word document is too big to send
as an attachment via the list.  Eventually,
this document should be linked to the group's
web page.  As a reminder, the next meetings are as
follows:

--Wednesday, January 3, 1:30 p.m.:

Overview of e-Asia; meet upstairs in Room 221

--Wednesday, January 24, 1:30 p.m.:

Overview of projects in Special Collections

Mark

*******************************
Digital Library Group Meeting
12/4/00

Attendance:  Sara Brownmiller (SNB); Bob Felsing (BF); James Fox (JF); Normandy
Helmer (NSH); Carol Hixson (CGH); JQ Johnson (JQJ); Mark Watson (MRW)

Agenda:

Welcome:

MRW opened the first meeting of the group by welcoming those present, noting
that five of the current members (SNB, BF, NSH, JQJ, MRW) had also participated
in the activities of the previous digital library task force.

Overview of Past Activities:

MRW distributed a packet of information consisting of documents that provide a
summary of the accomplishments of DigLib's predecessor: The Digital Library
Initiative Task Force.  All of these documents have been archived on LIBWEB at:
http://libweb.uoregon.edu/~jqj/diglib/

MRW commended the packet to everyone's reading, stating his opinion that many,
if not most, of the recommendations contained in Maintaining Progress Toward
Digital Library Collections and Services were still relevant almost three years
later and, in fact, could serve as an initial blueprint for the work of the
group.  An obvious example of this is the first of these recommendations: "a
new . group . should be formed to carry on the work we have started and perform
specific functions as noted .."   MRW added that he thought function
"b"-promoting "the sharing of information and coordination of efforts relating
to digital initiatives across library units"-was of particular importance.

JF said that he was less interested in pursuing abstract issues and discussions
than in setting about the work of developing standards, beginning to end project
management workflows and ways of working together on digital initiatives.  NSH
agreed, noting that mistakes can turn out to be expensive and labor intensive to
correct.  JQ spoke in support of the objective to share information and develop
mutual awareness of what is happening in the area of digital libraries.  JF
added that it would be best to have both a R&D arm as well as a production arm.
In the context of the latter, he said that the Library really needed a digital
library coordinator to spend at least part of his/her time pulling together and
facilitating the myriad aspects of such an undertaking.  CGH said she wanted the
group to be able to address issues like interoperability and sustainability.
She also stated that the group will need the strong support of library
administration in order to be able to obtain the information it needs from staff
across the library system.

The group spent some discussing various definitions of "digital library,"
recognizing that the scope of the group's activity will be greatly impacted by
the chosen definition.   Some of the issues touched upon included:

? Access databases:  should these be considered within the group's purview?
Some work has already been done to gather information on current developments
within the library system.
? Products of desktop office applications:  acknowledging that these are
electronic documents, there was no strong support for extending the group's
digital mantle that far.
? Digital projects intended for the use of an outside audience:  this will
clearly be a mainstay activity for the group.  SNB noted that digital projects
often start as a database of some kind and eventually begin to incorporate
links, images, audio, etc. that are intended for direct access by users.

BF raised some of the issues, questions, etc. that have come up in the course of
developing and implementing the e-Asia project: copyright; digitizing workflow;
how best to scan; keying data versus optical character recognition; quality
versus quantity; issues of text versus images.  Other issues noted by those
present included: archiving; storage; refreshing data and developing standards.

Outcomes and action items:

? The group concluded that it would be best to proceed by learning more about
current and ongoing projects.  In an effort to get up to speed, the group agreed
to meet twice in January 2001 in order to get overviews of e-Asia and the
various initiatives in Special Collections.  The following meeting dates were
set:

Wednesday, January 3, 1:30 p.m.:  Overview of e-Asia; meet upstairs in Room 221
Wednesday, January 24, 1:30 p.m.: Overview of projects in Special Collections

? As the group begins to get an overview of the digital projects already
underway and those in the planning stages, an inventory or matrix will be
created for cataloging and tracking purposes.  It was suggested that the Value
Set Questions could serve as a framework for this inventory.

? Members of the group agreed that will be important to become and stay informed
about developments in the area of digital libraries.  To that end, everyone was
encouraged to forward items of interest to the group's listserv:
diglib@lists.uoregon.edu.   It was also pointed out that D-Lib Magazine is a
good resource to consult.

? JQJ offered to provide the group with a summary of the progress that has been
made in the area of electronic theses and dissertations.

? SNB and CGH will pull together the work that has been done on databases in the
library and make a presentation to the group.

Minutes taken by MRW