 Library & Information Technology Association |
||
|
DATE = 2-28-07 GROUP = RFID Interest Group CHAIR = Lynne Jacobsen REPORTER = Lynne Jacobsen EMAIL = lynne.jacobsen@pepperdine.edu CONFERENCE = midwinter MEETING = Interest Group business meeting ATTENDEES = 48 CURRENT_ACTIVITIES = LITA RFID Interest Group Meeting Current chair, Lynne Jacobsen, called the meeting to order. About 50 people met to discuss RFID. The meeting began with introductions of all attendees. Sign-in sheets and agendas were distributed. The chair then invited program suggestions for ALA 2008. Dr. Vinod Chachra, Chairman of the NISO Standards Committee on Library Applications of RFID, and the CEO of VTLS Inc., presented A Progress Report on NISO's Work on RFID Standards in Libraries. The goals of NISO Standards Group are:
Dr. Chachra said that the NISO RFID Standard Group examined functions of self checkout, book-drop, sorting, inventory, media tagging, inter-library loan and supply chain tracking. Privacy is a big concern in the U.S.; however, Europe and Asia show less interest in this area. Much time was spent discussing privacy concerns. He cited Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF): "While RFID is a convenient way to track items, it is also a convenient way to do something far less benign-- track people and their activities through their belongings. EFF is working to prevent the embrace of this technology from eroding privacy and freedom." For more information on privacy concerns, go to http://www.cdt.org/privacy/20060501rfid-best-practices.php The Book Industry Study Group posted RFID Privacy Principles in 2004:
More information can be found on the BISG website: http://www.bisg.org/docs/BISG_Policy_002.pdf. Dr. Chachra discussed vandalism and responses to vandalism. He pointed out that responses to vandalism are likely to hinder interoperability, and place the library only a few steps ahead of increasingly sophisticated vandals. Libraries must choose whether the impediments presented to vandals outweigh the detrimental impacts of the protections. Different libraries are likely to find the balance point from different positions on this issue. For many libraries, the least expensive solution may be to accept the basic risks associated with RFID as an incremental difference over the exposure they encounter by maintaining their collections with open doors. Dr. Chachra discussed four levels of RFID interoperability:
At Level 1 libraries need to pay attention to the interoperability of current tags and future tags, the interoperability of current hardware/software and future hardware/software, and the interoperability of tags and hardware/software. He suggested using standard tags and standard data on the tag. At Level 2 libraries should consider use of the Application Family Identifier (AFI is a hardware feature designed into the silicon chip on ISO 18000 tags. AFI can prevent tags from different applications from interfering with each other) to prevent library tags from setting off alarms in book stores, and vice versa. At Level 3 libraries need to use a standard data model for the tags to guarantee interoperability of tags among libraries. At Level 4 the library supply chain is publisher, distributor, jobber, and library. Tags should be placed on books from the publisher and the data on these tags will be used for internal operations. The AFI codes will be programmable in the supply chain. The data on the tag will have different content at different stages of the supply chain. The NISO Committee's preliminary recommendation has three parts:
After he discussed the Data Model in detail, Dr. Chachra mentioned that in May/June 2007, the NISO Committee will have the final report of RFID Standards in Libraries. A panel of a dozen people began the discussion by providing updated information on current RFID activity and RFID standardization. Allan McWilliams of Baltimore County Public Library said that standards are a great benefit to the library side and the development side. Brian Green from EDItEUR,U.K., commented that ISO 18000 standards are looking good. He mentioned a useful URL www.bs.dk/standard/rfid. Gary Kirk, CEO of Tech Logic indicated they are working with 15693 and 18000-3 tags and encourage libraries to shop multiple sources for ISO 15693 and 18000 compatibles tags for the best price/performance. Tech Logic does not require customers to purchase RFID tags from Tech Logic, thereby supporting standardization and interoperability. Don Chvatal, President of Ringgold's OpenRFP services, reported that his company offers RFID discovery and educational support services to libraries and vendors, including RFP procurement support. John Fitzgerald from 3M stated that 3M supports the ISO standard. They see the standard as a huge boost to RFID implementation and they are happy to see standards moving in the right direction. Shai Robkin, CEO of Integrated Technology Group, stated that his company supports 3M's Standard Interface Protocol (SIP) and NISO Circulation Interchange Protocol (NCIP) for RFID. Shai suggested promoting standardized CD and DVD manufacturing. He said that libraries should demand that hardware and software read multi-data models. Lynne Jacobsen, chair of the RFID IG, asked how what effect will the new standards have on RFID vendors? Several answered that the ISO 18000 standard tag is available now. Vendors will move quickly to implement any additional required software changes. Brian Green said it would be a long time before publishers embed tags in books. He also recommended not locking the tag. Emmett Erwin, CEO of Bibliotheca RFID, said that the ISO recommended not locking the tag, but Bibliotheca RFID gave options and choices to libraries. Dr. Chachra said that tag must be unlocked because a locked tag hinders interoperability. Frank Mussche, CEO of Libramation, stated that his company uses a Philips tag and Philips is committed to research. This new tag uses an unlocking mechanism, a password, and write-protection to protect the data, and to minimize privacy concerns. Mr. Green said Europeans are not concerned with privacy and they don't think RFID is risky. Dr. Chachra said that it is ok to store item data on the tag, but it’s not ok to store personally identifiable information and transaction information on the tag. Some libraries use RFID on patron library cards. Connie Haley mentioned that the National Library of Singapore has been using RFID patron cards for checkout, printing, internet access, and overdue fees, etc. In addition, the RFID patron card also serves as a ticket for local transportation. Louise Schaper, Director of Fayetteville Public Library, suggested establishing a laboratory for testing library RFID technology. We agreed she had a good suggestion. The group began discussing the return-on-investment (ROI) of RFID systems. Though ROI is sometimes hard to calculate, the use of a conveyor belt/sorter can save labor, especially when libraries move into larger facilities and experience increased circulation. The value of user experience and satisfaction is more difficult to measure and put into a substantiated dollar figure. We hope to address this topic in more depth at a future meeting. FUTURE_ACTIVITIES = We will offer a program at ALA 2007 that will provide insight into new developments in library RFID technology, from theory to practice. The speakers will represent viewpoints from an RFID standards committee, an RFID hardware manufacturer, a library RFID vendor, and a public library. Join us to hear about inventory control, standards, hardware and more! Speakers in order:
At the ALA Midwinter business meeting, we will provide an update to RFID technology standards, as well as discuss current issues. We are planning a program for ALA 2008 that may include a debate/discussion about the trade-offs between the benefits of RFID vs. any privacy issues that libraries might have with RFID. Experts will address every key question to provide a "Reality vs. Myth" point of view on RFID technology. |
||
