MSC ALA Annual 2017 Meeting Agenda and minutes

1. General Introduction: farewell to departing members, welcome to new members


2. Status of our new charge (approved by LITA, no word from ALCTS yet)


3. Discuss the review process for the STS standard; how can our experience help us in the future?


4. Address low use of the Metaware.buzz Blog (note it is the only public posting of the Committee's Principles http://metaware.buzz/2016/08/04/principles-for-evaluating-metadata-standards/): Does this fit the new charge?


5. Discuss the desire to sponsor a session for ALA Annual 2018


6. Lauren’s question about $0 data from vendors

Minutes

1. Time and location




1. Sunday, June 25, 2017, 1:00 pm to 3:00 pm, US/Central




2. Announcements




1. Metadata IG presentation




1. People were interested to hear about our work; hunger for more evaluation.  Framework was perceived as having value.  DPLA conversation indicated an interest in this as a 'service.'




3. General Introduction: farewell to departing members, welcome to new members




1. Current membership list at:  http://www.ala.org/lita/about/committees/jnt-meta


2. Action:Erik will reach out to LITA - ask for nominees


3. Ayla Stein is new ALCTS rep.




4. Status of our new charge (approved by LITA, no word from ALCTS yet)




1. Action:  Erik will make sure the charge gets on the LITA page for the committee




5. Discuss the review process for the STS standard; how can our experience help us in the future?




1. The technical review work was pretty substantial and the feedback provided was in-depth.  We found the process really benefitted from a group effort.  If we created sub-groups to do the work we could review a few more standards.


2. Could form three groups of three; blended expertise groups (pair LITA and ALCTS), target communities of interest, seek volunteers who may not feel they have the expertise.  Perhaps ask for outside help, ask people to volunteer.  Call it a sub-committee so people can put on their CV; Start with the people who participated once and seed the work (Lauren, Mike, Erik); time limit of 2 hours;


3. Decision:  Form 3 groups; 2 committee members; time bound. Form groups in next meeting; review standards for one after that


4. Decision:  Need to watch out for more standards to review; engage in active list maintenance. (Digital humanities comm, W3); put list review on the agenda




6. Address low use of the Metaware.buzz Blog (note it is the only public posting of the Committee's Principles http://metaware.buzz/2016/08/04/principles-for-evaluating-metadata-standards/): Does this fit the new charge?




1. Current connect platform being replaced in Auguest - may serve our need


2. If you do not have the community editor role established you do not need the blog; it does have an identify outside the library world.  Could defer


3. Decision:  Defer decision until technology reboot happens at ALA.  Work to push principles more through ALCTS and LITA channels




7. Discuss the desire to sponsor a session for ALA Annual 2018
   Lauren’s question about $0 data from vendors




1. Summary:  Vendors beginning to use $0 for URI and other information.  This use case has been implemented by OCLC; starting to see content showing up.    In addition $1 (links to real-world objects) is emerging as an approved practice.  There is a URI task force for PCC that is releasing their recommendations on this issue (URI task group report, April 15, 2017)




1. A potential action:  Open discussion with Marc Advisory group; PCC about the issue


2. A second potential action:  Review using principles; 


3. Decision:  Keep issue under consideration; members could review PCC URI taskforce.  Debbie will send out link to committee




8. Brainstorming for the coming year




1. review of standards


2. outreach to committees




1. PCC


2. ALCTS standards committee


3. NISO


4. IFLA




3. sponsor session for Annual 2018.  




1. due soon; 


2. Could devote first hour to a presentation; could do some modification but we are likely to be in a hotel in the next meeting


3. Decision: Do not pursue




4. revisit metaware.buzz discussion


5. presentations to groups -


6. regular meeting schedule?


7. Work directly with DPLA to give early feedback:




1. Action:  reach out to DPLA to find out if they have a near term need




8. develop liaison relationships




1. alcts standards relationship


2. metaadta interest groups


3. DPLA


4. NISO


5. IFLA


6. Document in connect lists committees that we could do outreach to




9. meeting schedule




1. monthly in past year worked;  essential to continued work






10. Authorities -anything we want to focus on?  Should authority work be done in old MARC formats




1. Session idea:  one project about how people outside the library world found authority useful and vice versa (bridging idea) (SNAC / VIAF)


2. Something with datasets - standards for datasets; work with data science librarians; 




9. Next steps




1. Erik and Nadine will setup meetings for group


2. Next meeting agenda:




1. Plan out standards review work


2. Discuss ALA Midwinter agenda and plan


3. Plan out an outreach and committee engagement plan (other committees)