Home1999 Annual Conference CCS Executive Committee Minutes
Annual Meeting 1999
New Orleans, LA
June 24-June 29, 1999
*=Motion or action
**=Assignment
I. First Session 6/24/99 6-8 pm
Attendance
Paul J. Weiss, Chair
Dorothy McGarry, Past Chair
Tim Carstens, Secretary
Michael Kaplan, Member-at-Large
Mary Dabney Wilson, Member-at-Large
Laurel Jizba, Member-at-Large
Cynthia Whitacre, Member-at-Large
Sherry Kelley, Member-at-Large
Elizabeth Cramer, ex-officio, Chair, PRC
Karen Muller, ex-officio, Executive Director, ALCTS
Absent:
Jay Lambrecht, Vice-Chair/Chair Elect
Guests:
Bernie Karon, ALCTS Budget & Finance liaison
Mary Larsgaard, CC:DA, preconference program presenter
Kit Herlihy, Chair, CETRC
Tony Olson, CCS Representative, Publications Committee
Diane Dates Casey, Chair, SAC
Robert Boyer, CCS Representative to PLA Cataloging Needs of Public Libraries
Lori Robare, Incoming Chair, SAC
Jane Gilchrist, CCCM
Wen-ling Liu, CC:AAM
1.1 Approval of the minutes
The latest revisions of the minutes of the 1999 Midwinter meeting were approved. These were the minutes distributed to the committee via e-mail on June 23, 1999. The minutes will be posted on the web after the Annual Conference.
1.2 Continuing education
1.2.1 1999 Annual Conference Programs
1.2.1.1 Sat. 9-11 am = SAC: Oh Say, Can You See? See Also?
Subject Referencing Possibilities in OPACs and Reference Databases
Diane Dates Casey reported that the program was ready to go.
1.2.1.2 Sun. 9:30 am -12:30 pm =PRC: Publish! Information,
Networking, and Motivation for Cataloging Research
Elizabeth Cramer reported that the program was ready to go.
1.2.1.3 Monday, 2-4 pm = PLA Cataloging Needs of Public Libraries Committee: Cooperative Cataloging Goes Public
Paul Weiss reported that all of the paperwork had been filled out to make CCCM a name-only co-sponsor of the program but that CCCM was not listed as a co-sponsor in the program.
1.2.2 2000 Program Planning
1.2.2.1 CC:AAM
Wen-ling Liu discussed CC:AAM's plans for a program on the challenges of Pinyin conversion in the online environment. The conversion project covers all aspects of library workflow including the romanization guidelines, subject headings, classification schedules, Chinese geographic names, the conversion of bibliographic and authority records and file maintenance. Local workflows of both technical services and public services will be affected. Because of the scope of changes involved CC:AAM would like to explore issues related to the conversion and their impact on library systems. The year 2000 is an excellent time for a program because that is when LC and RLG will convert the bibliographic records. The CC:AAM program hopes to present reports from the representatives of LC, OCLC and RLG on the problems they are having with the conversion of the bibliographic records and with other issues related to conversion. They would also like to have representatives from CEAL and one of the East Asian collections talk about their views on the conversion. Wen-ling Liu said that the length of the program had not yet been decided. The CCS Executive Committee advised her that it appeared that there was enough material for a three-hour program. Sunday from 9:30 to 12:30 appears to be a good time for the program. Weng-ling Liu reported that CC:AAM plans to seek ACRL AMES cosponsorship and they have already contacted them about this. They will also explore other co-sponsors. She also reported that the program will be aimed at technical services, systems and reference librarians. The CCS Executive Committee advised her that it is difficult to reach all three of those groups. To make it successful, speakers have to be carefully advised. CC:AAM was also advised to pick a title that would emphasize the importance of the issue to BOTH reference people and technical services people. It was also noted that it might be too late for a program aimed at systems people; if they haven't done their job by mid-2000 then we are all in trouble. Finally, the CCS Executive Committee advised CC:AAM to get a creditable public service person as a speaker and someone to speak on authority control. The LITA/ALCTS CCS Authority Control in the Online Environment Interest Group is another possible co-sponsor.
*CCS Executive Committee approved moving the program forward.
1.2.2.2 CC:DA
Mary Larsgaard presented CC:DA's plans for a year 2000 preconference on metadata. An eight-member task force has been formed to plan the preconference. Their first meeting will be on June 26, 1999. The preconference task force is currently working on an accelerated time schedule, but they hope to catch up with the established schedule for preconferences by July. Daniel Kinney is working to line up cosponsors. At this point possible cosponsors are MARBI, the Serials Section Committee To Study Serials Cataloging and the ALCTS Committee on Networked Resources and Metadata. OCLC is also very interested and has offered to sponsor the coffee breaks. Mary Larsgaard worked with Karen Muller on the financial aspects of the preconference and Karen says that the financial side looks good. The purpose of the preconference is to deal with metadata where metadata is interpreted as meaning metadata for WEB resources (not other types of metadata). The audience will be catalogers and other librarians who are responsible for providing access to WEB resources in their library. The idea is that the speakers will present them with the advantages and disadvantages of the various options for making WEB resources accessible. A challenge for the preconference planners is that the subject of metadata changes very quickly. Therefore, the topic list must be specific enough so that the speakers know what should be presented, but general enough to allow them to adjust to the changes that are sure to take place in the coming year. Scanning, subject related bibliographer WEB pages, and tips that could be learned from how museum people handle "visual resources" are possible topics that may be covered.
CCS Executive Committee members had a number of questions and comments about the written preconference proposal that was distributed at the meeting. The planning committee is looking for an administrator who is also familiar with cataloging and were proposing that Michael Gorman fill this role. CCS Executive members suggested that Carol Mandel, Jennifer Younger or Sarah Thomas might be better choices. SAC, the Catalog Form and Function Committee and the RUSA Catalog Use Committee were suggested as additional cosponsors. It was suggested that the words "brief cataloging" be removed from just below session 2 since AACR2 allows for several levels of cataloging and since some library directors could misinterpret it. It was suggested that cooperative ventures for handling metadata be prominently featured. Mary L. agreed strongly.
*CCS Executive Committee approved moving the preconference forward.
1.2.2.3 CCCM
Jane Gilchrist discussed CCCM's plans for a program on subject access to children's materials. This will be a program on subject access for children, not for university students who are studying children's materials. Among the topics that will be discussed will be how children search for materials. Do they use the same search strategies as adults, or do they search in a different way? Other topics include established subject heading lists, such as LC's annotated card program headings and Sears. Another possible topic is: how do children search on the INTERNET? How children search for audiovisual materials is another possible topic. Working with OPAC vendors to get them to improve their products to provide better access is another possibility. The program would not last more than two hours and it is anticipated that 150-200 people may attend. It will be aimed at technical services people who know nothing about service to children. Speakers have not yet been identified. People at LC, Sears, the PLA Catalog Use Committee and AASL have been contacted and asked if they have ideas about possible speakers. PLA, AASL and SAC are also possible co-sponsors. The program would probably be held on Saturday or Sunday. Bernard Karon wondered whether there would be strong attendance given a weak showing at a recent institute on a similar topic. Karen Muller pointed out that programs (with no extra charges) generally get stronger attendance than institutes and that earlier programs on children's cataloging had been well attended. Paul Weiss cautioned against trying to cover too much in two hours.
*CCS Executive Committee approved moving the program forward.
1.3.1 Council resolutions on headings related to class and poverty
Diane Dates Casey distributed a new draft of the Background Paper on the SAC Task Force on LCSH Subject Heading Revisions Relating to the Poor People's Policy. This draft contained a number of changes to the draft distributed to CCS Exec. via e-mail. The changes were made as a result of further conversations with Lynn El-Hoshy at the Library of Congress. The new draft clarifies some statistics on SACO activities. The Library of Congress actually establishes 90% of all headings sent to it through the SACO process. 30% of all new LCSH headings originate with the SACO process. Another change in the new draft is the inclusion of a statement in the 3rd paragraph noting that some of LC's decisions related to Hennepin County's suggestions were the result of LC policy on subject headings. Hennepin's headings required a level of precoordination that was not judged desirable in LCSH. Another clarification in the new draft is the observation that the heading "Poor" was established in 1898 while the heading "Rich people" was established in 1996. Both headings were established according to the patterns being used when they were established, but those patterns have changed. A final addition in the new draft was the observation that some headings proposed by Hennepin appear to have no literary warrant in LC's collection.
This new draft of the Background Paper had already been passed on to Alex Bloss, the Counselor for ALCTS. Because of this, and because the defects in the document were not judged to be serious, CCS Executive approved the document for use by Bloss. However, a number of changes were suggested for further use of the document.
The bodies named in the first paragraph should be the ALCTS Board of Directors and the Cataloging and Classification Section Executive Committee. The 2nd to the last sentence in the 3rd paragraph should be changed to "Other headings, such as "Corporate welfare" appeared to have no work in LC's collection that required that subject heading." Reference to "literary warrant" in that sentence was deleted. Finally, the first sentence of the 4th paragraph should be changed to say, "SAC was also concerned with the volatility of real world usage of terms related to groups of people." The phrase "the volatility of humane, unbiased subject headings" in the first sentence of the last paragraph should also be changed to "the volatility of real world usage of terms related to groups of people."
The revised document was also approved by the CCS Executive Committee.
In a general discussion of the background paper, some concern was expressed about LC's assertion that there was no literary warrant for the heading "corporate welfare." Several committee members suspect that there is indeed literary warrant for such a heading, even if LC might not have a book on this topic in its collection. It was suggested that this matter could be investigated by the SAC task force. There was also considerable discussion of the fact that Hennepin County did not use the normal SACO process to make heading suggestions. There was a strong feeling that, instead of submitting a long list of headings without having done the SACO required research, Hennepin County should have gone through the same SACO process that is available to everyone else who wants to establish new headings.
SAC will appoint a task force on this issue at this Annual Conference. At this Conference, the Task Force will meet to establish an agenda, a time-line, and to consider various documents related to this issue. They will report according to the time line noted in their charge. A copy of the Task Force charge was distributed to the CCS Executive Committee.
1.4 Committee on Cataloging: Asian and African Materials
1.4.1 Kahler tribute.
The Kahler tribute was approved. Paul Weiss will render it into formal language before it is officially submitted. It currently lacks the whereases, etc.
1.4.2 Liaison relationships
OCLC and the Library of Congress have agreed to establish formal liaison relationships with CC:AAM. OCLC and LC have already identified individuals who could serve as liaisons. RLG does not wish to establish a formal liaison relationship, but they intend to continue to send one of their staff to CC:AAM meetings. The liaisons will receive all e-mail and correspondence that other committee members receive. They will not have voting rights.
*The CCS Executive Committee approved these liaison relationships.
1.5 Committee on Education, Training, and Recruitment for Cataloging
Paul Weiss began the discussion by noting the mentoring documents and the Knowledge and Skills Document had been discussed over e-mail by the CCS Executive Committee and that there had been some concerns. Kit Herlihy and Paul Weiss had also had a long discussion about CETRC matters. Paul Weiss said that he had promised to send Kit a summary of the Executive Committee's comments on the documents including his own comments. He was not able to do this because he got sick but he will send the comments after the Conference is over. Paul Weiss noted that what the CCS Executive committee is looking for is a more concrete picture of what CETRC is trying to do, most especially, what CETRC's role in the project would be. Other questions include, how many people would be involved in the project.
Kit Herlihy responded that CETRC is developing documents describing what would be expected from recruiters and mentors, what the recruiters and mentors can expect from CETRC. An evaluation procedure for the project is on CETRC's agenda for Saturday, June 26th.
Paul Weiss said that it sounded like CETRC was making progress in "concretizing" the mentoring program.
1.6 Chair report
1.6.1 ALCTS Board of Directors
Because of the vacancies in the ALCTS office, Paul Weiss did not receive a Board agenda until Thursday. In an ALA report on Electronic Publishing, ALCTS seems to be further along in this area than other divisions. This report also includes a definition of publication. This is an issue that has concerned CCS.
ALCTS is considering charging people for viewing the ALCTS Newsletter Web product and for the use of other ALCTS WEB products. This is a way to ensure that membership perks only go to those who have paid for them, that is, ALCTS members.
1.6.2 Confirmation of e-mail votes
AMIM, letter from CC:DA to LC asking for an extension on comments to May 1, 1999 --- e-mail approval was confirmed.
The report on AMIM draft from CC:DA to LC --- e-mail approval was confirmed.
CC:DA's report of IFLA Guidelines for OPAC display -- e-mail approval was confirmed.
Recommendations for FORO attendance to IRC - the following e-mail results were confirmed -- Steinhagen representation and attendance, yes. Mueller representation and attendance, no.
All approvals were confirmed by a unanimous voice vote.
Executive Session:
Karen Muller's performance appraisal was discussed.
Second Session 6/27/99 11:30-1:30
ATTENDANCE:
Paul J. Weiss, Chair
Jay Lambrecht, Vice-Chair/Chair-Elect
Dorothy McGarry, Past Chair
Tim Carstens, Secretary
Sherry Kelley, Member-at-large
Laurel Jizba, Member-at-large
Cynthia Whitacre, Member-at-large
Mary Dabney Wilson, Member-at-large
Absent:
Elizabeth Cramer, Chair, PRC, ex-officio
Michael Kaplan, Member-at-large
Guests:
Bernard Karon, liaison to ALCTS Budget and Finance Committee
Patricia Luthin, Chair, Cataloging and Classification Research Discussion Group
Marlene Chamberlain, ALA Editions
Don Chatham, ALA Editions
Troy Linker, ALA Editions
Linda Gabel, SAC, OCLC
Tony Olson, liaison to ALCTS Publications Committee
Peggy Johnson, President-Elect, ALCTS
October Ivins, Organization and Bylaws
2.1 ALA Editions
Don Chatham discussed the publication of AACR2 products. He stated that ALA editions understands the importance of AACR2 and is committed to meet more frequently with the JSC, CC:DA and the CCS Executive Committee. He also explained a number of circumstances that contributed to some of the confusion surrounding the publication of the 1998 revision of AACR2. These circumstances have now improved.
At the moment, ALA Editions plans to update AACR2 immediately upon approval of amendments by the JSC. In practical terms this means that updates will be sent out within 30 days of the approval of amendments. Don Chatham stated that ALA Editions is committed to the concept of synchronicity of the electronic and paper versions of AACR2. The only question is the best technical means to achieve this end. Replacement CDs would be one way to update the electronic version. However, ALA Editions is leaning toward updating the electronic version of AACR2 by installing changes on the web and enabling customers to download the changes and then have the changes incorporated into their underlying electronic formats. This "rt patch" technology works as long as the changes are not too extensive. More extensive changes may be problematical. There are also plans to create a "patch" especially for LC Cataloging Desktop, however, the update schedule for this product may differ due to the fact that the Desktop is updated on a quarterly basis. They are considering updating the paper version by making the amendments available on the web in pdf format (arranged so that it would fit on 8 1/2 by 11" page). These would either be the text of the changes themselves, or the changes as incorporated into the text, with notations of what those changes are. Another possibility is packaging the amendments in the same way as the 1993 Amendments were packaged. For libraries that do not have access to the web, they also plan to carry a stock of paper copies of the amendments that would be available upon request. In regards to marketing of the products, ALA Editions is considering the use of a subscription model in which libraries would automatically be sent all updates. Most of the members of the CCS Executive Committee seem to believe that this would be the most sensible model.
The CCS Executive Committee asked about the looseleaf (or "drilled") version of AACR2. Chatham said that less than a thousand copies of the drilled 1988 revision of AACR2 had been sold. Chatham also said that they had created a run of 1,000 copies of the 1998 revision in looseleaf form. Members of the CCS Executive Committee were extremely interested in the 1998 revision. Most of the committee gave their business cards to ALA Editions in order to get order information for the drilled version.
Chatham was asked how often new editions of the regular print version of AACR2 might be expected. Chatham said that this would depend on when there were enough substantial amendments to justify a new edition. AACR2 is a big book and is costly to produce. Therefore they need to sell a large number of copies in order to make a profit. Speaking off the top of his head, Don Chatham estimated that there might be new edition every two years. Some CCS members noted that revised chapter 9 would be a major change in the rules that might justify a new edition.
The issue of the synchronicity of the ALA CD AACR2 (which uses Folio 3.1.1) and LC Desktop (which uses Folio 4.2) was discussed. It was decided that this was an issue that was mainly a concern of the Library of Congress and ALA Editions and that it was not really a concern of the rest of the cataloging community. This was because it is unlikely that any library would ever use both products.
Questions were raised about the Concise AACR2. A new edition of this work had been prepared under the direction of Michael Gorman that included changes that had not yet been approved by the JSC. The production of this version had been stopped and the manuscript had been turned over to the JSC. A version of the Concise AACR2 without the unapproved changes is now in production. ALA now considers the Concise AACR2 to be an official "AACR2 product." CCS Executive Committee members still had concerns about who had the right to edit this product. There were strong feelings that Michael Gorman should not be editing this work since he has not been actively involved in cataloging for many years.
Paul Weiss asked if Mary Huchting was still involved in the production of AACR2. Chatham replied that her work with AACR2 was a temporary assignment and that she is now back on her regular assignment.
Paul Weiss thanked the staff from ALA Editions for their detailed report and for their efforts to gather feedback from the cataloging community. The ALA Editions staff members left for their next meeting.
2.2 ALA/ALCTS Representative to the Joint Steering Committee for Revision of AACR2 report.
Paul Weiss reported for Brian Schottlaender. Schottlaender has not yet written the resolution commending Mary Huchting's work on AACR2 but he still intends to do so. There was nothing else to report from the JSC other than what would be reported by CC:DA.
2.3 Letter to ALA Editions on AACR2 updating schedule
Sherry Kelley had written a draft of a letter from the CCS Executive Committee to ALA Editions expressing the committee's strong feelings about the need to maintain synchronicity between the paper and electronic versions of AACR2. She distributed a draft of this letter to the committee on Friday. However, it was agreed that ALA Editions had addressed the concerns of the CCS Executive Committee in their report. Therefore, the letter was no longer necessary. *Sherry Kelley will write a new letter to ALA Editions. The new letter will thank them for addressing the concerns of the committee. The letter will specifically state what we are thanking them for so that CCS's concerns will be on paper. Paul Weiss thanked Sherry Kelley for her efforts.
2.4 Cataloging and Classification Research Discussion Group
Pat Luthin answered the CCS Executive Committee's questions about a draft charge for the group that had been distributed via e-mail prior to the meeting. In an e-mail message, Karen Muller had suggested that the term "showcase" be changed to "venue." Dorothy McGarry suggested that the words cataloging and classification research rather than organization and retrieval of information should be in the charge since they are in the name of the discussion group. Pat Luthin noted that they had gotten better responses when asking for volunteers to speak when they used the words "organization and retrieval of information" than they did when they used the words "cataloging and classification." Paul Weiss responded that marketing can be done separately from the charge. Dorothy McGarry also said that the discussion group is not just a venue for viewing and discussing the latest research projects. It is also a venue for discussing problems encountered in getting ideas, methodologies, and a place to find others with whom to collaborate on a particular research project. Cynthia Whitacre suggested that having a broader charge, as suggested by Dorothy McGarry, would allow greater flexibility and allow the discussion group to support discussions on a greater variety of topics. There was also a suggestion that there be an official relationship between the discussion group and PRC. The question of who would rewrite the charge was postponed until the Tuesday, July 29th meeting.
2.5 Chair report
2.5.1 ALCTS Board of Directors
The Board of Directors met on June 26. There was a request from Dale Swensen editor of the ALCTS newsletter to change the frequency of the newsletter from 6 times a year to 4 times a year. It was noncontroversial.
Organization and Bylaws has developed criteria for what committees should have division representation. These committees must either be administrative in nature or they must be involved in tasks that involve secret input or the maintenance of formal communication within the section. Paul Weiss read a list of the division level committees that the Board felt should have sectional representation. This will be an action item to the ALCTS Board on June 28th. Paul Weiss said that he plans to vote in favor of this unless CCS Executive members have problems with this.
The other issue was liaison relationships. Organization and Bylaws has recommended that ALCTS adopt the definitions developed by the ALA Special Presidential Ad Hoc Committee on External Relationships. There was a considerable amount of confusion about exactly what those definitions were. Different members of the CCS Executive Committee had different information about the definitions. October Ivins shared her understanding of the definitions with the committee. However, the confusion regarding these definitions was not fully resolved until the Tuesday, June 29th meeting.
Organization and Bylaws had also been asked to look at ALCTS policy regarding programs at midwinter. They recommended that properly conducted discussion groups, hearings, and at least some type of reporting sessions and forums are permissible during the midwinter meeting. Presentations that do not permit universal discussion and are not related to the work of the association or its committees are not permitted. Paul Weiss stated that they are basically saying that we should keep doing what we are already doing.
2.5.2 Guidelines on Subject Access to Individual Works of Fiction
The draft of the 2nd edition of the Guidelines on Subject Access to Individual Works of Fiction, which was approved by SAC at their midwinter meeting, was discussed. Since the document was too long to review at midwinter, CCS Executive Committee review of the document was postponed until the annual conference. Paul Weiss stated that he had very grave concerns about the document because the syndetic structure is inconsistent, because the vocabulary is poorly done, and because the way the terms relate to each other is inconsistent. Another concern was expressed by the British Fiction Indexing Group. This group pointed out that LC is implementing fiction and genre authority records. Since one of the goals is to maintain consistency with the LCSH vocabulary, the document should not be published. Concerned parties should instead be working with the Library of Congress to get these terms included in LCSH. There is a good chance that new terms might also be submitted through the SACO process. Paul Weiss stated that he was concerned about the proliferation of standards. If there is a need for a distinct standard because existing standards are not adequate that is one thing, however, new standards should not be developed if existing standards are adequate. The Library of Congress's work in this area has changed the environment since work on the Guidelines began. Since the environment has changed, Paul Weiss believed that the Guidelines should not be published. Mary Dabney Wilson responded that she had heard that LC was not planning to use 655s for some time. She stated there is a strong need for the Guidelines. People need them now and can not wait for the Library of Congress. Some of the inconsistencies that concerned Paul Weiss were deliberate and resulted from the fact that people felt strongly about certain terms. There was also a concern that many of Paul Weiss's comments would change the whole thrust of the document. Since that would delay publication and since there is a strong need for the document now, many committee members felt that the current document should go forward. Significant changes could then be made in a possible third edition of the document. The CCS Executive Committee was polled for their opinion about whether to send the document forward for publication. *The majority of the CCS Executive Committee wished to see the document move forward for publication (straw vote = 5 for, 1 against, 1 abstention, 3 absent). However, the committee also agreed that a brief opening statement should be added to the document saying that the principle to have vocabulary agree with LSCH when possible did create some internal inconsistencies.
2.6 Appointments
Jay Lambrecht passed out a list of his tentative CCS committee appointments.
Third Session, June 29, 199, 8:30-12:30
ATTENDANCE
Paul J. Weiss, Chair
Jay Lambrecht, Vice-Chair/Chair-Elect
Dorothy McGarry, Past Chair
Tim Carstens, Secretary
Laurel Jizba, Member-at-large
Michael Kaplan, Member-at-large
Cynthia Whitacre, Member-at-large
Sherry Kelly, Member-at-large
Mary Dabney Wilson, Member-at-large
Elizabeth Cramer, ex-officio, PRC
Guests:
Carol Hixson, incoming Member-at-large
Adam Schiff, incoming Member-at-large
Bernard Karon, CCS Rep to ALCTS Budget and Finance Committee
Tony Olson, CCS Rep to ALCTS Publication Committee
Mary Charles Lasater, CCS Rep to RUSA MOUSS Catalog Use Committee
Julianne Beall, Library of Congress
Diane Dates Casey, Chair, SAC
Carlen Ruschoff, CCS Rep to IRC and CCS Rep to LRTS
Bill Garrison, CCS Rep to ALCTS Membership
Gregory New, Library of Congress
Dan Kinney, Chair, CC:DA, ALCTS Program Committee
3.1 Chair report
3.1.1 ALCTS Board of Directors
Paul Weiss reported on a number of motions related to liaison relationships that were passed by the ALCTS Board. One motion specified that liaisons can only be appointed to groups outside of ALCTS. In the original proposal from the Organization and Bylaws Committee, CC:DA was to have been exempted from the provision, however, this exemption was not part of the motion that passed. Observers could still be sent to any committee's meetings, however, these would not be official appointments, they would not be listed in the ALA Handbook of Organization and they would not receive committee correspondence. Liaison relationships may have term limits but that had not yet been decided at the time of the meeting. Finally, appointments would all be made at the division level. These changes were to take place immediately after the 1999 New Orleans Annual Conference.
The members of the CCS Executive Committee expressed strong concerns about these motions. It was felt that they were extremely detrimental to the conduct of CCS business. It was felt that lots of input on these technical and international issues from within CCS and ALCTS was necessary for standard making bodies like CC:DA and MARBI. *The CCS Executive committee asked Carlen Ruschoff (as next year's ALCTS President) to exempt CC:DA and MARBI from these rules. Specifically, these two committees should allow sectional appointments so as not to disenfranchise groups that need to have a say in the recommendations passed by these standard-making bodies. Narrow term limits were also seen as a problem due to the fact that it often takes several years to become really familiar with the work that a committee is doing and due to problems in finding people with the background and motivation to be liaisons. Three years with reappointment was seen by CCS as a reasonable term. CCS Executive Committee instructed Paul Weiss to work for changes in the new policies on term limits, sectional appointments and intradivisional liaisons. The policy against intra-divisional liaisons was seen as the most harmful.
3.2 Committee on Cataloging: Description and Access
Dan Kinney reported that CC:DA currently has seven task forces in operation. Four of them are related to the JSC meeting in October. These four task forces are reviewing the Delsey report, the Hiron report, ISBD(ER) and AACR2 Rule .024. The report of the task force on ISBD(ER) is almost complete. Most of the work that remains is editorial work. The report should be completed by July 30. CC:DA will vote on the report in the first week of August. Three of the task forces are concerned with metadata issues. These are the preconference planning task force, the joint MARBI/CC:DA task force on metadata, and the task force on VRA Core Categories. The preconference has been approved by the ALCTS Program Committee and the ALCTS
Budget and Finance Committee.
CC:DA is sending a series of recommendations on AACR2 rule .024 to the JSC. These include a recommendation to rearrange the chapters of AACR2 in ISBD order and a recommendation to treat content, carrier and form of issuance as equals. On the question of format variation, their recommendation is to ignore manifestation variations. A proviso for making separate records for changes in manifestation will be added (especially allowing for separate records for cassettes and CDs).
CC:DA also held a meeting with Jean Hiron and a joint meeting with MARBI.
In regard to the letter to the Library of Congress on the criteria for considering conferences named, CC:DA added a paragraph to the letter saying that the first recommendation is tied to the Rule change proposal currently being considered by the JSC. McGarry still felt it was important to see what JSC would do in regard to all of the issues involved before the recommendations went forward. Others did not have objections to the letter going forward as it is currently written. * The CCS Executive Committee voted to approve the letter.
3.3 ALCTS Program Committee
Dan Kinney reported that the ALCTS Program Committee had discussed the pre-conferences that were to be held before the Annual Conference in Chicago. These preconferences include CC:DA preconference on metadata as well as one by the Research and Statistics Committee entitled "Systematic Study, Small Scale Research Methods for On-The-Job Application" and one by PARS entitled "Saving a Century." There are two CCS programs being considered. One by CC:AAM is entitled, "The year of the dragon" and the one by CCCM is entitled "How Children Search, How Savvy Librarians Respond."
The Program Committee also has a charge from the ALCTS Board to develop a method of working with Section Executive Committees to develop a more proactive program planning process. The committee would like to invite Chairs, Past-Chairs, and Chairs-Elect to discuss the issue with them at the midwinter meeting. Another idea was to send people to the discussion groups because that is where the hot-topics first come out. Also the ALCTS Office could give the Sections the program evaluation forms, which include the question, what programs would you like to see?
3.4 Subject Analysis Committee
Two documents were distributed to the CCS Executive Committee. One was the "Report of the SAC Subcommittee to Review Guidelines for OPAC Display." SAC approved the report during its Sunday meeting. The other document was the Final report of the SAC Subcommittee on Metadata and Classification.
One part of the charge of the Metadata and Classification subcommittee was to promote the use of classificatory frameworks for use with metadata. They have not done this part of their charge, but the membership of the subcommittee is now only five people and so they are not ready to proceed further. This part of their charge will be taken up by the larger group, the SAC Subcommittee on Metadata and Subject Analysis. Their plan is to hold a discussion forum on the subject at the 2000 Annual Conference. At the forum there will be a discussion of the issues that were brought up in the Metadata and Classification report. They will then come up with a user-friendly summary of the document to share with the cataloging community. There are also plans to put the report on the CCS SAC web site.
SAC had planned to submit both the OPAC Display report and the Metadata and Classification report to the CCS Executive Committee for approval. However, Paul Weiss said that the CCS Executive Committee does not need to approve the Metadata document unless there is an action item involved. The OPAC display document does not need approval because it has already gone out.
The SAC program "Oh Say Can You See? See Also? Subject Referencing Possibilities in OPACs and Reference Databases" was attended by approximately 250 people. The group will be shifting its focus at midwinter to examining subject referencing in CD-ROM and INTERNET subscription databases.
A new SAC subcommittee has been established to review DEWEY 540, Chemistry. They are looking for people to appoint to the subcommittee who are familiar with both DEWEY and chemistry. These people are rare and they asked CCS Executive members for any suggestions they might have. The report needs to be in by September.
SAC voted to co-sponsor the metadata preconference in Chicago.
The Subcommittee on Metadata and Subject Analysis revised their document, "Subject Data in the Metadata Record, Recommendations and Rationale." They will be sending the document to SAC in the summer. OCLC is interested in implementing some of the recommendations. Lois Mai Chan is interested in sharing the document with IFLA (it would labeled as a working draft). Paul Weiss also said that it could be put on the WEB. The above recommendations were addressed to the Dublin Core. The group plans to move on to consider other metadata systems. They are also going to begin planning for a program on metadata and subject analysis for the 2001 Annual Conference.
The SAC Subcommittee on Form Headings/Subdivision Implementation gave an educational forum. Their charge has been extended another year. Once LC started to implemented the subfield "v" a number of questions arose about local implementation, so Mary Charles Lasater has agreed to continue another year. They are going to be developing a recon checklist that will follow the SCM prescribed usage. It was suggested that the SAC WEB site would be a good place for this document. It must be labeled as a committee working document. CC:DA has similar documents on their page.
The SAC task force on LSCH subject heading revisions relating to the Poor People's policy was appointed. Ruth Bogan is Chair. They met on Sunday June 27 to discuss the tools that they will be using to review the subject headings and developed a strategy for conducting the review and a timeline. They plan to have their final report to SAC in October.
*The CCS Executive Committee thanked Diane Dates Casey for her work as Chair of SAC.
3.5 Cataloging of Children's Materials
Jane Gilchrist reported on the CCCM proposed program: "How Children Search, What Savvy Librarians Need to Know." Five topics will be covered:
1) How children search.
2) The tools and resources that are currently available to people
3) OPAC profiles and dealing with automation vendors.
4) A practical presentation from someone who is using a child specific system.
5) How children search the Internet.
PLA Cataloging Needs of Public Libraries is a possible co-sponsor.
3.6 Policy and Research Committee
Beth Cramer reported that, responding to a request from Sheila Intner, the PRC is working on "sound bites" which are little pieces of statistical information that can be used for publicity reasons by ALCTS. For example, "there are more public libraries in the United States than MacDonalds." The PRC brainstormed about the question of what the public might find interesting about cataloging and how to put this in a cultural context. Two volunteers from PRC will work on this with Beth.
About 80 people attended PRC's Sunday program. A wide variety of topics were discussed, including, how to find a research topic, how to get it published, and what to expect after submission of an article for publication. Twenty people stayed for the roundtable discussion following the program. L. Jizba suggested that this is the kind of program that could be repeated. B. Cramer noted that the PRC might follow up with a publication in LRTS. Two of the panel members have already written up papers; it is hoped that three formal papers could be derived from the presentation for the LRTS publication. A short summary for the ALCTS newsletter will also be written.
The charge of the PRC was again discussed. The deletion of the sentence: "To consider and recommend to the CCS Executive Committee policies relevant to the Cataloging and Classification Section." from the PRC charge was proposed. P. Weiss suggested that the Executive Committee ends up discussing the issues anyway, so why not just delegate any necessary work to a Member-at-large and leave the PRC to do research. It was noted that much more policy work is done at the Division level than at the section level. D. McGarry suggested that it might be difficult for the Executive Committee to consider things like committee charges without using too much of its time and that it was good to have a committee to assign this work to. She also noted that, at one time, policy took up much of the time of the PRC. Until recently, research has been a secondary activity of the committee. On the other hand, M.D. Wilson noted that policy and research are very different things and it seemed odd to assign them to the same committee. Another question was how much policy work had been expected of this committee in the past.
The CCS Executive Committee decided to give the PRC the job of reviewing the charge of the Cataloging and Classification Research Discussion Group. It was decided that this was appropriate because this job relates to the "research" part of the PRC's charge, and yet is also a "testing" of the not-recently-used
"policy" part of PRC mission. They could then be asked again about their charge. The PRC should also try to get some of the background information from old minutes etc, about the history of policy discussions in the PRC and also look at they way other sections handle this question.
B. Cramer reported that the PRC had decided to leave the research topics list on the PRC web site as a committee document. They may pursue it in the future as a publication.
3.7 ALCTS International Relations Committee
Carlen Ruschoff reported that the IRC is revising its guidelines for representation and funding to allow for the funding of non-IFLA activities and to make them more readable. The final amendments to the guidelines have been made and should be posted to the Web page soon. According to these guidelines, the word "representation" can reflect simply attendance at a meeting with the intent of reporting on information from the meeting to an ALCTS unit; it can mean bringing back action items that require a response either from ALCTS or an ALCTS subgroup; or it can mean speaking for ALCTS or an ALCTS subgroup through knowledge of ALCTS activities or a mandate from those groups, while using common sense.
Last year the IRC provided $4,000 for IFLA funding and $1,000 for funding for other conferences. They plan to continue this basic 4 to 1 formula in future years.
It is time to start seeking IFLA nominations. The nomination process goes on for some time and a lot of paper work needs to be submitted on time. Nominations will be sought this fall for CCS-related IFLA positions with terms beginning in 2001.
The IRC is interested in co-sponsoring any kind of program that has an international" aspect.
It was noted that neither the LRTS Editorial Board nor the IRC will have sectional representation.
3.8 LRTS Editorial Board
Carlen Ruschoff is encouraging people involved in research to report it to LRTS. They are also looking for people to review books.
Someone on the LRTS Board suggested that the LRTS Board might consider providing research grants to people who are thinking of writing a paper, but they need financing to do this. This problem will be addressed in the midwinter meeting.
ALA has plans to put all its publications on the Web but LRTS will not be among the first things to be brought up there.
Someone on the LRTS Board suggested it was time to change the name of LRTS. This will also be on the agenda at midwinter.
The ALCTS Newsletter will be changing to a quarterly publication.
3.9 Publication Committee
Tony Olson reported that the manuscript for the "What in the World..." preconference was sent to ALA Editions in March. It was to be published as part of the ALCTS Papers series. Tony reported that he had heard unofficially that ALA Editions had decided not to publish it. If that is that case, ALCTS will have to self-publish it or find an independent publisher.
The Guidelines on Subject Access to Individual Works of Fiction were approved Sunday. Olson reported that he had received the final manuscript and will transmit it to the Publications Committee. He stated that he expected the document to move quickly through the committee approval process. If the ALCTS Publications Committee approves it, it will go to ALA Editions, and they have the option of publishing it. Olson also said that he plans to talk to Karen Muller about the possibility of making the document available in electronic form. Jay Lambrecht will also approach Karen Muller about this possibility.
The ALCTS Annual that was proposed at midwinter was discussed by the Publication Committee. The Committee strongly suggested that the Annual be published as a web document to be put on the ALA server and not as a CD-ROM that would be distributed to the membership.
Olson reported that the new publication procedures document that the ALCTS Publication Committee has been working on is basically finished. But now that the ALA Publishing Committee has come up with a definition of an ALA publication (which they are submitting to Council), the ALCTS Committee has decided to hold off on sending the new publication guidelines forward until they could refer to the ALA publication definition. If the ALA definition is forthcoming, the new publication guidelines will go to the ALCTS Board at the midwinter meeting.
The issue of web page linking was discussed. Olson stated that if a document is considered an "official publication" then a link will appear on the ALCTS web site under their list of publications. Other documents will be appear on the web site of a particular committee or subcommittee.
Olson reported that he had looked at the publications sales report and had some information on the sales of AACR2. He stated that 9,100 copies of the binder edition have been sold. 113 network licenses for AACR2(E) have been sold. 65,000 paper copies and 14,700 hardcover copies of the 1988 edition were sold. Over 5,000 paper copies of the 1998 paper edition were sold.
3.11 Other CCS Representatives
3.11.1 ALCTS committees
3.11.1.1 Budget and Finance Committee
Bernie Karon reported that the committee had met twice. The committee discussed >the ALCTS endowment and concluded that not enough money was generated by the endowment yet to be used for any significant purpose. The money generated by the endowment is therefore going back into principal. Hopefully more money will be generated at some time. He also reported that ALCTS still does not have enough money in reserve to meet ALA policy on the matter but that this situation was much better than it had been in previous years. ALCTS currently has a surplus of $25,000. This is mainly due to the many vacancies in the ALCTS Office. A deficit of $36,000 is projected for next year when many of these vacancies will be filled. In reality the deficit will not be that bad because some funds will not have been used. Also, the Budget and Finance Committee has been pleased with the upcoming preconferences. These are expected to generate funds and should help the budget situation.
The Budget and Finance Committee will be meeting in a joint session with the Strategic Planning Committee next midwinter meeting. The Budget and Finance Committee is charged with developing a financial plan, and this can't happen until the strategic plan is determined. The Committee has been looking for trends that trigger dues increases. Along with this is the never-ending discussion of the relationship between dues increases and decreases in ALCTS membership. Are there ways to justify dues increases and to show members how they benefit from their membership in ALCTS?
ALCTS has been asked to commit money to the Spectrum initiative. However, ALCTS is concerned that there is no guarantee that the Spectrum scholars will have ALCTS interests (so far out of 100 current scholars only 8 have expressed interest in ALCTS areas). ALCTS wants to contribute to its own initiatives, as opposed to Spectrum, in order to guarantee that money will be going towards helping those with ALCTS interests.
Lastly, the Budget and Finance Committee discussed a document from ALA Counsel on socially responsible investing. People agreed that it is a good thing, however, the difficulty is that each of us defines socially responsible investing in a different way.
3.10 CCS Discussion Groups
Paul Weiss noted that in regard to the Authority Control in the Online Environment Interest Group, one of the things that he was supposed to have done was write a letter for Sheila Intner to send to LITA asking LITA to make sure that ALCTS is on the sign-in sheets. Paul Weiss stated that he had not gotten around to doing this. He says he should have delegated this. Paul Weiss encouraged Jay Lambrecht to delegate tasks to Members-at-Large when he becomes Chair of CCS.
3.11 Membership Committee
William Garrison reported that no new statistics were available on membership because of the switch in ALA's management system. A huge list of new and dropped members was sent to the Membership Committee at the end of February. Membership continues to work on other initiatives. The booth was manned at New Orleans Conference and all of the hours were filled. The location of the booth was not as good at the New Orleans Conference as it had been in Washington, D.C. Two recruitment letters are being drafted to try and recruit membership. One will be sent to vendors and other commercial people. The other letter will be sent to library schools, specifically, to people who may have an interest in ALCTS.
It was also noted that it would be helpful if the Executive Committee would encourage program chairs and discussion group chairs to announce ALCTS sponsorship of their activities and to make ALCTS membership information available.
3.12 CETRC
Jay Lambrecht reported that CETRC had retracted all of the documents that had previously been submitted to the CCS Executive Committee for approval. CETRC has decided to concentrate on mentoring students in library schools. They are putting the other aspects of the recruitment and mentoring initiative on hold for now.
3.13 Other business
The question of the format of documents on the web page was discussed. The ALCTS office can get things up in pdf format very quickly. It takes them a long time to put things on the page in html. Karen Muller had asked if documents could be put on the web page in pdf. The committee decided that documents longer than one page long could be posted in pdf format. Shorter documents (that people might want to read on the screen) should be posted in html.
3.14 Committee membership roster
Jay Lambrecht stated that the ALCTS office volunteered to send to out the committee letters in anticipation of having their new membership system in place. This turned out to be a premature offer. One quarter of the names on the list have not yet been contacted. So the roster is not official because not all of the people have actually agreed to be members. The list is the best that we have now.
Click here to go to the CCS Executive Committee
|
