Minutes

DISC meeting for October 22, 2003
Room 124 Main Library
Present: M. Alt, W. Boomgaarden, N. Couch (minute taker), S. Logan, S. Rogers, B. Russell


Agenda 

1. Brief review of current projects

 

Foxe (Marti): Marti forwarded information regarding grant proposal to get metadata done.  Grantors have reserved $10,000 (our request was for $20,000) contingent on OSU partnering with an ATLA/ATS member, such as SMU’s Bridwell Library, since the membership requirement cannot be waived.  Depending on what it entails, partnership may change scope of project.  Bridwell is well-endowed and may see value in getting metadata done.  Sharing funds with them, however, would not work for us.  It appears that some images must come from the partner; however, we must keep focus on the woodcuts of the first four editions.   Can Bridwell just put their stamp on it to sponsor?  Whose ownership statement goes on?  We need to clarify with the committee what exactly the partnership entails.  Marti will follow up.

 

Forestry (Susan, Sally): For metadata finalization, Susan and Connie went through to check fields against what Charly had done (for ex., Publisher in DMC equated to contributor).  He used rights column for both institution and copyright.  Susan added repository place field.  Charly will make dates readable for the user, and will also show us how to update records once loaded.  Susan will do a concise statement of what needs to be done in mapping and what is public view field and what is hidden, and send CB the revised spread-sheet.   Beth will look at it before it goes.  Regarding a metadata error that caused some concern, Susan and Connie think it is something Charly keyed, so that error doesn’t exist.  He is supposed to be getting space allocated to do ftp process and will do linking as long as file name is in spread sheet (file identifier).  We have to be very sure that file identifiers on discs match up.

 

Sally noted a need to revisit the terms of use discussion regarding URLs to use.  URLs were made up by Stephen for inclusion as the document went to Legal Affairs, and these are still just locations without text right now.  Sally will double check with Charly on how terms of use link will appear in each record.  We have to set up email list so curators will receive emails for use requests.  It was noted that it would be preferable to have some explanatory information in each DMC record with the terms of use URL, unlike the LACMA URL.

 

Button 1: no update

Button 2 (Susan): Susan has talked with Leta who accepts not digitizing the slides of the exhibit.  Leta has already digitized the postcards, but it is unclear whether she wants to contribute those to DMC or not.  Sally and/or Wes will send a letter saying until such time that Leta has obtained the recreated exhibit, our understanding is that the project is on hold.

 

Dare (Nena): Jason expects to finish scanning of final pieces (those that went to Harry Campbell for conservation) by end of this week.  He still has some large pieces to photograph.  Only about 300 records have been input, with approximately 700 + remaining.  Nena is working with Kathleen to try to speed up process.  While Nena had intended for Jason to move to inputting once the digitization is done, it may be that she should should hire another student to work with Kathleen since it makes most sense for Jason to do other database activities at TRI.

 

4. Review of pending projects

Ohio Journal of Science out-source update (Sally, Susan): The estimates are back.   Susan has talked with Shannon Tippie.  Anderson’s is not available as a source right now.   Shannon gave information to Development to search for other sources, but there is no response yet.  Susan has permission to go to Columbus Foundation.

 

Hale Scrapbook (CGA) (Beth): Lucy Caswell has a practicum student compiling metadata for the majority of items.  Beth has discussed with Charly the model he proposes – to digitize each image separately and use database framework of DMC for record information.  Since the pages themselves were re-created in the conservation process, we could use HTML to put the items back in a virtual arrangement and point back to DMC.  The technical details could be worked out, possibly with the record information and images live in DMC and the HTML live at OSU.  It probably makes sense to do it as two-part project.  It would be possible to scan the background of pages and use that as the background for HTML presentation of pages.  Charly suggests focusing first on getting information for each item and then tackling the issue of display locally.  They haven’t done this kind of thing at OhioLINK but could do.  Since there is now a way it could work, we need to look at economic feasibility. 

 

Each item can be photographed or scanned separately.  Nothing obstructs anything else, as far as we know.  There are some loose pieces that have remained loose.  Lucy has a student interested in working more hours who had worked with Amy on San Francisco so she is a possibility.   Based on ˝ hour per image, it would take a student approximately 440 hours (880 images includes individual items on page, loose items, and full page images) at probably a higher rate of student pay plus hours for the remaining metadata.  We need to deal with the web part of project.   Beth will talk further with Lucy.

 

(Sally) Mark Sandler mentioned that I-Archive [?] in Utah has a product similar to Olive.  Michigan has an experimental program with them underway.  It may be that there are other people who will give better pricing model for this kind of project than Olive.  Beth noted that it would be interesting but not necessary for the Hale project but would be great to have for Lantern. 

 

Cooper documents (RAR) (Wes): Cooper – Wes hasn’t heard back from John Bennett yet.  We need to clarify the stage in the process that this original document – a typescript – represents, and why would be putting it up – because of the manuscript or because of the information in the manuscript.  There needs to be OCR under text.  Sally noted that this sounds like the e-book repository OhioLINK wants to develop.  Discussion will continue next time after Wes talks with John.

 

5. Retrospective ETDs (Wes): They have not come back yet.

 

6. Discussion regarding the draft addendum to the OSUL Exhibits Policy: 

In response to the question marks in the draft,

1)      IT person to assign regarding the technical aspects – we don’t have one right now;

2)      Scanning: scanning arrangements need to be made by the curator although if OSUL funding is requested, the proposal should come through DISC;

3)      Costs: DISC suggests that funding come from the exhibits committee budget and outside sources.  It was noted that this will be a significant issue when there are both real and virtual exhibits.  Even if curators have their own funding, they may still want to come through DISC for help with technical and economic issues;

4)      Metadata for the exhibition: it was unclear to DISC what this means -- cataloging websites for exhibits or for the physical catalog to link to website?  DSpace was discussed as a platform because the exhibitions are locally produced content and would have Dublin Core metadata.  Sally will talk to Laura.

5)      Maintenance of digital exhibitions: We probably need to define space for this so there is a pathway but are not in a position to do at the moment.  It may be something for DSpace.  Sally will talk to Laura.

 

Other comments/questions:

1)      OIT may be hosting library website in future and for some reason seems willing to do it for free.  There are some questions such as – since the website is database backed, where does database live?   

2)      Why is Dreamweaver specified?  It shouldn’t be required – the outcome should be specified rather than the technology to get there. 

3)      For web design consultants, we could have approved list and set guidelines regarding technology that can/can’t be used so the consultants don’t design something that we can’t accommodate. 

4)      300 dpi not high enough – should say appropriate level. 

 

Nena will forward responses, comments and questions to Lucy.

 


7. DISC discussion about the Electromagnetic Metal Forming Handbook (translation from the Russian by OSU's Dr. Daehn, MSE ): The author is willing to convert his website to PDF.  He wants to get the document into a more permanent location, free up his server, and make the work available to world.  There was discussion about the advantages/disadvantages of HTML and pdf, particularly in DSpace where it does not fit particularly well as a website.  We should suggest to the professor that he encourage those he advised and includes on his bibliography to transfer theses and dissertations to electronic form, so we can include in e-theses flow.  Sally will get back to Mary Jo Arnold.

 

The website address:
< //www.mse.eng.ohio-state.edu/%7EDaehn/metalforminghb/index.html>


8. ACCAD tour was October 21 at 3:30 p.m.  Sally and Susan will contact Maria Palazzi for another tour, perhaps with whoever fills Stephen’s vacant position on DISC. 

 

9. Other


The Baggs Collection: Wes had forwarded a new e-mail from Susan Wyngaard regarding. Dr. Margaret Carney and progress being made with cataloging the collection.  An IMLS proposal is in the works.  We suggest that Susan review her DISC proposal.  If there are substantial changes, she should let us know.  We might want her to come to another meeting. 

 

Great Lakes proposal: a project proposed by Mark Sandler of Michigan to CIC since a number of CIC institutions border Great Lakes.  The CIC equivalent of DISC asked for more information.  This is probably a topic for a future meeting of DISC. 

 

Next meeting Nov. 5.  Sally will not be here.  Susan will take minutes.

 

Suggestions for agenda:

Invite Tom Cetwinski

Laura for a DSpace demo