technical services law librarian · technical services law librarian, march, 2004 page 3 solicit...

Technical Services Law Librarian, March, 2004

http://www.aallnet.org/sis/tssis/tsll/tsll.htmISSN: 0195-4857

Volume 29 No. 3March, 2004

Newsletter of the Technical Services Special Interest Section and theOn-Line Bibliographic Services Special Interest Section of the American Association of Law Libraries

INSIDE:

Technical ServicesLaw Librarian

(continued on page 16)

Surfing for Preservation Topics

There’s a wide world of informationabout preservation on the Internet.Typing “preservation” into a simpleGoogle search yields some productiveresults. [Warning: the informationwhich follows may be a duplication forthe preservation experts among you.]

One of the first sites I found was anAmigos site <http://www.amigos.org/preservation/selectsupplies.html>The basic guidelines for selectingpreservation supplies are very useful.For example, it lists chemically stableplastics for enclosures and it also liststhe plastics to avoid. Likewise, it liststhe paper and board products that aresafe to use and the products that areharmful. Preservation short-cuts toavoid are also listed. Also, you cancheck Amigos out for suppliers forbook repair <http://www.amigos.org/preservation/bkrepsup.html>. Inaddition, check Amigos forpreservation leaflets that range fromgeneral topics to book repair toemergency preparedness and recoveryto replacement resources. Includedamong the general resources are

preservation videos that can berequested through interlibrary loan.<http://www.amigos.org/preservation/leaflets.html>

The University of Hawaii haspreservation information. Two of theURL’s sampled offered first, a sourcesof preservation supplies <http://l i b w e b . h a w a i i . e d u / l i b d e p t /preservation/preserve_supplies.html>and secondly a bibliography of webresources on preservation, mold, pestmanagement and disaster resource onthe WWW <http://libweb.hawaii.edu/libdept/preservation/resources.html>

Stanford has a massive disasterpreparedness site including selectedreprints issued by SmithsonianInstitution, National Archives andRecords Administration, Library ofCongress and the National ParkService. Among the resources listed,there is a link to Disaster Planning forComputers and Networks by RichardW. Boss. There is also a link toSOLINET resources. Additionallythere are links to recovering from atornado: Trial by Tornado and TIC-TAC-Tornado by Willie M. Jones about

PreservationSally Wambold

University of Richmondwambold @uofrlaw.richmond.edu

WWWWWelcome to newelcome to newelcome to newelcome to newelcome to newPreservPreservPreservPreservPreservationationationationation

columnistcolumnistcolumnistcolumnistcolumnistSally WSally WSally WSally WSally Wamboldamboldamboldamboldambold

From the Officers:OBS-SIS Chair............................4TS-SIS Chair................................3

Columns:Acquisitions.............................4Classification...........................6Description & Entry................7Management........................9MARC Remarks.......................11OCLC...................................12Preservation.........................1Research & Publications........13Serials..................................14Subejct Headings................15

Reports:Research Roundtable Report....172004 OBS Survey Results.....20

Technical Services Law Librarian, Vol. 29, No. 3

OBS-SISChair:

Kevin ButterfieldCollege of William & Mary

Vice-Chair/Chair-Elect:Georgia BriscoeUniversity of Colorado

Secretary/Treasurer:Michael MabenIndiana University-Bloomington

Members-at-Large:Ruth FunabikiUniversity of IdahoAndrea RabbinSyracuse University

Education Committee:Kevin ButterfieldUniversity of Illinois, Urbana

Local System Committee:Corinne JacoxCreighton University

Nominations Committee:Ismael GullonMercer University

OCLC Committee:Darcy JonesMercer University

RLIN Committee:Virginia BryantGeorge Washington University

Web Advisory Committee:Anne MyersBoston University

2003-2004 Officers and Committee ChairsTS-SISChair:

Gary Vander MeerNorthern Illinois University

Vice-Chair/Chair-Elect:Cynthia MayUniversity of Wisconsin

Secretary/Treasurer:Patricia Sayre-McCoyUniversity of Chicago

Members-at-Large:Jolande GoldbergLibrary of CongressLorraine LorneUniversity of Arkansas, Fayetteville

Acquisitions Committee:Diane AltimariNova Southeastern University

Awards Committee:Chris LongIndiana University, Indianapolis

Cataloging & Classification Committee:Amy LovellDuquesne University

Joint Research Grant CommitteeEloise VondruskaNorthwestern University

Nominations Committee:JoAnn HounshellChicago-Kent College of Law

Preservation Committee:Patricia K. TurpeningUniversity of Cincinnati

Program/Education Committee:Jean PajerekCornell University

Serials Committee:Frank RichardsonLos Angeles County Law Library

TSLL EDITORIAL POLICYTechnical Services Law Librarian (ISSN 0195-4857) is an official publication of theTechnical Services Special Interest Section and the Online Bibliographic ServicesSpecial Interest Section of the American Association of Law Libraries. It carriesreports or summaries of the convention meetings and other programs of OBS-SISand TS-SIS, acts as the vehicle of communication for the SIS committee activities,and carries current awareness and short implementation reports. Prospective authorsshould contact the editors for style information.

Statements and opinions of the authors are theirs alone and do not necessarily reflectthose of AALL, TS-SIS, OBS-SIS, or the TSLL Editorial Board.

Subscriptions: Provided as a benefit of membership to Sections members. Non-member subscriptions: Domestic: $10.00; Foreign: $20.00. Contact the TSLLBusiness Manager or the American Association of Law Libraries.

Publication Schedule

Issues are published quarterly inMarch, June, September, andDecember.

Deadlines:V.29:no.4(Jun.2004)......... .30 April 2004V.30:no.1(Sept. 2004)........31 Aug. 2004V.30:no.2(Dec. 2004).........31 Oct.2004V.30:no.3(Mar.2005)..........31 Jan. 2005

TSLL StaffEditor:

Joe ThomasUniversity of Notre [email protected]

Business Manager:Cindy May University of [email protected]

Layout & Design:Linda TesarVanderbilt [email protected]

Webmaster:Martin E. WisneskiWashburn [email protected]

Contributing Editors:Acquisitions:

Janice AndersonClassification:

Beth HolmesMarie Whited

Collection DevelopmentMargaret Maes Axtmann

Description & Entry:George Prager

The Internet:Kevin Butterfield

Management:Caitlin Robinson

MARC Remarks:Susan Goldner

OCLC:Darcy Jones

Preservation:Sally Wambold

Private Law Libraries:vacancy

Research and Publications:Chris Long

Serials:Margaret McDonaldChristina Tarr

Serial Issues:vacancy

Subject Headings:Aaron Kuperman

Editorial Board:OBS-SIS:

Karen Selden (2002-2004)University of ColoradoSharon Burchard (2003-2005)University of San Francisco

TS-SIS:JoAnn Hounshell (2002-2004)Chicago-Kent College of LawMargaret Perrin (2003-2005)New York Law School


solicit volunteers for office, ascolumnists for TSLL, and the otheractivities that keep us a vitalorganization.

One task for the first year boardmember at large is the recruiting andscheduling of members to staff the TS-SIS table in the exhibit hall at theannual convention. This year that taskfalls to Jolande Goldberg. It is a greatway to meet new members, toconvince other AALL members that TSpeople really are normal (whatever thatmeans), and it can be a great way toget off your feet for a little while. Seeyou there.

One last item remains before I close.The theme for the Boston meeting isBoston to Mumbai: the World ofLegal Information. The internationaltheme is a prophetic one. Recentlistserv discussions about outsourcinghave emphasized the transference ofservice activities outside this country.Functions in technical services havebeen outsourced for decades. Many ofus purchased LC catalog cards, andlater had our shelf lists copied forretrospective conversion. We use

catalog information fromaround the world in addingvalue to our online catalogs,and purchase material fromfar and wide. Nevertheless,it is an issue full ofapprehension, bottom linecalculations, and furtherchallenges to our alreadystressed environment.

Despite it all, I hope yourwinter/early spring is afulfilling one. I’ll be in touch.

Gary Vander MeerNorthern Illinois University

[email protected]

Technical ServicesSpecial Interest Section

From the Chair

As I work on these articles, I alwayshave a sinking feeling in the pit of mystomach. What I write now you willread in about two months. Some ofwhat I write will no longer be “news”,other items will be resolved, and therewill be new issues that aren’taddressed. This morning it was 13degrees below zero when I drove in towork. Since I live just over a mile away,there is no point in turning on theheater and blowing frigid air at my faceand body. By the time you read this, Ihope we will have experienced a 60-degree (above zero) day, and I mayhave walked to work. We are never ina steady state condition. Change is aconstant. However, this is now. Thepost holiday winter doldrums seem toaffect everyone here, and yet we areaccomplishing things.

This is the time of the year that theassociation and the SIS begin to gearup for change. JoAnn Hounshell andher nominations committee haveannounced a slate of candidates forofficers for the SIS. Karen Douglasand Joanne She are candidates for Vice-Chair/Chair-Elect; Elizabeth GeeseyHolmes and Chris Long are candidatesfor Secretary/Treasurer; and CarmenBrigandi and Brian Striman arecandidates for the Executive BoardMember at Large position. I believe wewill see a process with considerablyless angry rhetoric than we have heardfrom Iowa and New Hampshire so farthis year.

There will also be change in the worksfor TSLL. Joe Thomas has been editorof the newsletter since 2001, and hasindicated that he will resign as of theend of this volume. The editorial boardwill soon be working on findingsomeone to continue the work Joe hasso admirably done. Also, Linda Tesar,who has worked with the newsletter,first as co-editor and then in charge of

layout and design, for six years, hasdecided that that is enough. Thesechanges mean a great deal of work forthe board. This seems like a prime timeto begin serious discussions with theOBS-SIS on moving to electronicpublishing. Kevin Butterfield and I willbe soliciting input from ourmemberships on this topic.

Chris Long and the Awards Committeehave begun their work on the ReneeChapman award. I have served on threeof these committees, and it is a realpleasure to see what members of theSIS think of each other, and the workwe do. It also made me feel a bit like aslacker in my commitment. Theprevious honorees are all faithful SISmembers, who have given of their timeand energy far beyond any reasonablerequest to make our jobs easier and tomake the SIS better.

Ellen McGrath and the members of theTask Group on Replacement Volumespresented a summary of itsdiscussions and possible options foraction to Judy Kuhagen in December.Judy had requested AALL assistance inexamining the policies for handlingreplacement volume sets in the new“Integrating Resources” environ-ment. The task group now is waitingfor a draft LCRI, and will presentfeedback on it to LC. GeorgePrager, a member of the group, hasmore information on the report inhis column in this newsletter. Forthe report, check out the TSwebsite.

Cindy May prepared the annualmembership survey, and will becompiling the results. I hope youtook the time to complete thesurvey. It is used to requestcomments on annual meetingprograms, to plan for the futureactivities of the SIS, and to


Oh, the incredible profit by diggingof ground! ~ Thomas Fuller, Historyof the Worthies of England (1662)

OFrom the Chair

nline Bibliographic ServicesSpecial Interest Section

Kevin ButterfieldCollege of William & Mary

I am finishing this column onGroundhog Day. I did see my shadowthis morning as I was scraping ice offthe windshield of my car but I don’t thinkthat means we will have any additionalweeks of winter weather. It does, however,have me thinking about a Spring Trainingvacation in Arizona. Here is a brief updateon what your SIS has been up to.

Membership Survey

The annual membership survey isfinished, and the results are publishedin this issue. Many thanks to OBS-SISvice chair Georgia Briscoe and ourincredible web master Anne Meyersfor putting it all together. The surveyis an important tool for your SIS to useto determine programming and togather nominations for SIS electionsin addition to providing us with muchneeded feedback. Do not, however, feelthat you have to use the survey aloneto let the board know what you think.Email, call, or telegraph any of us atany time.

Elections

The Nominating Committee (IsmaelGullon (Chair), Barbara Szalkowskiand Corrine Jacox) have produced an

excellent slate of candidates for ourelections in April. They are:

Vice-Chair/Chair-Elect: SusanChinoransky & Richard M. Jost

Member-at-Large: Shannon Burchard& Caitlin Robinson

The ballots for the election will bemailed in early April 2004. The ballotswill include a URL indicating a pageon the OBS-SIS web site wheremembers may view the biographicalinformation for the candidates.Viewing this information will requirean OBS-member user name andpassword. The user name and passwordwill be distributed by email to the OBSlist and also in print with the paperballots. The OBS-SIS thanks each ofthe candidates for their willingness torun for office.

TSLL editors

Joe Thomas and Linda Tesar will bestepping down from their positionswith TSLL after the final issue of thecurrent volume is produced. They haveboth done an incredible job with ournewsletter. We owe them many thanks

for their hard work in creating apublication we can all be proud of.

MARBI Representative

Susan Goldner, the AALL MARBIrepresentative, has informed JanisJohnston, AALL President, that shewill not seek a second three-year term.Accordingly, Janis has asked the chairsof TS and OBS to recommendcandidates for the post. On behalf ofthe section I want to thank Susan forher excellent work. Gary van der Meerand I have forwarded a list ofcandidates to Janis Johnston and lookforward to her expeditiousappointment of a new MARBIrepresentative.

Between the surveys, elections,editorships and representative slotsthere are many opportunities tobecome involved. Have a wonderfulspring and I will see everyone inBoston!

AcquisitionsJanice Snyder AndersonGeorgetown University

[email protected]

Journals both Print and Electronic:Journals both Print and Electronic:Journals both Print and Electronic:Journals both Print and Electronic:Journals both Print and Electronic:Getting More for Your MoneyGetting More for Your MoneyGetting More for Your MoneyGetting More for Your MoneyGetting More for Your Money

Access to electronic forms of journalshas expanded rapidly in the pastdecade. Law libraries have access viaLexis, Westlaw and Hein Online to lawreviews, bar journals and legal

newspapers, but now online access toa wider range of journals is possiblefor more libraries and individuals aspublishers become more willing toexpand their products and services.


Cambridge also has a free TOC alertingservice and registered users canpurchase pay-per-view articles.University law school libraries may beable to share in a site licensearrangement acquired by their generalacademic libraries for all the journalsof the university press.

Kluwer Law International (now a partof Aspen) charges libraries 20% morefor a print + electronic subscriptionthan for print alone. If you choose thehigher level subscription, your regularAspen representative should be able togive you the name and email addressof the contact in the Netherlands whocan arrange for access to theelectronic versions.Not all of their journals are currentlyavailable over the web, and it is not asimple matter to determine which onesare, so for your convenience I list theavailable titles here: Air and SpaceLaw, Arbitration International, ASABulletin, Business Law Review,Common Market Law Review, EC TaxReview, European Business LawReview, European Environmental LawReview, European Public Law,European Review of Private Law,International Journal of ComparativeLabour Law and Industrial Relations,Intertax, Journal of InternationalArbitration, Journal of World Trade,Legal Issues of Economic Integration,World Competition, and World Tradeand Arbitration Materials.

Last Spring, Brill acquired Kluwer LawInternational’s publishing lists in theareas of public international law andhuman rights. This includes a numberof journals published under theMartinus Nijhoff imprint, which Brillmakes available on the web through theIngenta Select gateway. When a libraryhas a print subscription to a Brilljournal, there is no additional chargefor the electronic version. Table ofcontents alerts are also available. Toactivate any online journals withIngenta Select (they have arrangementswith many publishers), a library mustfirst register and then supply thejournal customer numbers forverification. This means a bit of

digging to get the number for eachtitle, but it is worth the effort.

Blackwell Publishing, which wasformed by the merger of BlackwellPublishers and Blackwell Science inJuly 2001, publishes a number of law-related titles. It offers a standardsubscription that includes print andonline access to its issues for thecurrent year and one year back. At aprice that is 10% higher, its premiumsubscription includes print plus onlineaccess to “all available onlinebackfiles” (usually 1997/98 onward),archival access to paid-for content,early articles, and ILL articles.Blackwell has its own service calledBlackwell Synergy, but its journalarticles are also available throughgateways such as Ingenta Select,OCLC’s ECO and Ebsco Online.Blackwell Synergy allows forsearching its journal database andreceiving emailed alerts.

Elsevier has expended considerableeffort in making its ScienceDirectproduct into a huge and valuabledatabase of scientific, technical andmedical literature. A few of itsimprints publish journals of interest tolegal researchers, e.g., InternationalJournal of the Sociology of Law andthe International Review of Law andEconomics and some business, financeand accounting titles, so it may beworthwhile to investigate its options.Their journal subscription fees arehigh, but anyone can search thedatabase and find free abstracts for alljournals, and there are per-articletransaction fees for non-subscribedjournals.

As I have noted above, it is becominga common practice for publishers andsome aggregators to permit non-subscribers to search their journalcollection databases. This can be aboon for those libraries that do nothave access to a number of indexingsubscription databases or researcherswho want to cast a wider net than usual.The purchase of individual articles bynon-subscribers can also reduce ILLtraffic.

I have been digging for information anduncovering various options that Ithought I would share with otherlibrarians who seek to hold down costswhile providing greater access toinformation resources for our patrons.This article does not deal withlicensing journal collections frommajor aggregators; rather, it attemptsto demonstrate the possibilities formaking the most of the individualsubscriptions that may already be inplace.

Publishers of journals that carry lawand law-related articles includeuniversity presses as well ascommercial publishers such asWolters Kluwer and Reed Elseviercompanies. Pricing schemes andcoverage vary. All the ones that I willmention allow for linking directlyfrom an online catalog or web page toindividual journals. Some permitsearching the text of their journaldatabases regardless of whether or notyou have a subscription. In addition toavailability, factors considered inseeking electronic journals includesuch issues as IP range access ratherthan password authentication,availability of PDF files, and archivalaccess to paid-for content.

Oxford and Cambridge UniversityPresses initially offered free accessto electronic versions of their printjournals. Now, both charge for suchaccess. Beginning with 2004, Oxford’sstandard institutional subscription foreach title includes both print andelectronic versions. They marketprint-only at a 5% discount andelectronic-only at a 10% discount. Afree table of contents alert service isavailable for all their journals.Cambridge University Press offersinstitutions subscriptions to print +electronic. Electronic-only pricesappear to be in the 15 – 18% lowerrange. (Pricing models are in flux aspublishers try to decide how to charge.Initially, prices were cited as $x forprint and $y more for print pluselectronic, but now we see the standardbeginning to shift to the norm beingone price for print + electronic.)


Marie E. WhitedYale Law School

[email protected]

Elizabeth Geesey HolmesUniversity of Georgia

[email protected]

Classification

K

Library budgets are shrinking asinstitutions, agencies and firms callfor economies and as materials costsrise rapidly. The options that I haveoutlined above often do have anassociated cost, but access toinformation is speeded up as articles

How do you decide to class somethingin a law schedule? The simple answeris first you decide if the work in handis about law. For most of the titles wecatalog, it is an easy decision. It isobvious from the titles, the table ofcontents, book jackets, prefaces, etc.that the works are about the laws ofsomething. We see words such as law,laws, regulations, statutes, acts,legislation, procedure, courtdecisions, cases, digests and so on.The author has a legal education and isa lawyer, judge, or law teacher. Yes, Iknow this is over simplifying.

If it is so easy, why do law books getinto other classes? Why does acataloger class the regulations forbecoming a dentist in R? Some peopledo not recognize that the work is legaland should class in K. Why do we sitand puzzle over whether the titleclasses in taxation (H) or taxation (K)?Many works contain both the lawsabout and the policies on topics. Weoften see subtitles indicating the workscontain social, political and legalviews.

What is a classifier to do? First, youhave to recognize law titles. You dothis by learning something about law.

Legal research books are a great helpand you should take a legal researchclass if one is offered at your lawschool or library school. Legaldictionaries help us know the meaningof those strange terms we see. Whaton earth is “Contango andbackwardation”? Read the very goodpart 1 of Cataloging Legal Literatureby Lembke and Lawrence. Makefriends with your reference librarians.Some have a real feel andunderstanding of what we do and canbe very helpful. Read law books. Reada classification schedule. The morelaw you catalog, the more law you willlearn.

Second, you have to be able toexamine a work carefully to see if it ismostly about law or only partly aboutlaw. The “partly about law” books arethe ones that will cause you to have todecide on whether to class in a Kschedule or not. I always give myselfa fifty percent rule – if the book is 50percent or more law, class in a legalschedule. If the work is less than 50percent law, class in a nonlegalschedule. As a caveat to this, try todetermine the author’s intention andthe audience of the book. Sometimesif there is slightly more nonlegalcontent but the author’s intention is toclarify some point of law, you mightwant to class the work in a lawschedule. When there is nostraightforward classification number

for the work in hand, use your bestjudgment. There are no easy answers.If you are really on the border,remember you work in a law library.If in doubt, prefer a K class!

Be sure to read the guidelines in partF10 of the Subject CatalogingManual: Classification, some ofwhich are below.

Section of F10:4. Use the most specific number

available. Use a broader numberonly if no specific number isavailable and it is not feasible toestablish one.

5. Where several subjects arediscussed in a work, choose theclassification number according tothe most appropriate of thefollowing guidelines:

a. Class according to instructionsprinted in the schedules.

b. Class according to dominantsubject.

c. If no subject is dominant, classunder the first one mentioned inthe work being cataloged.

d. Class with a broader subject, ifthe work deals with severalsubjects that, taken together,constitute a major part of a largersubject.

are brought to the desktop in seconds.There are also potential ramificationsfor reduced cost as well as betterservice. For example, if our facultymembers and partners are willing toswitch to e-mailed tables of contentsrather than relying upon routed journal

issues or photocopied TOCs, then wewon’t need to spend as much forreplacement issues for binding or forstaff time. All in all, it pays to weighthe options as the publishers continueto package their products in shiftingcombinations.


6. In problematic cases where severalnumbers appear satisfactory, classaccording to the intent of the authoror where it appears that the workwould be most usefully located.

7. Unless instructions in the schedulesor past practice dictate otherwise,class works on the influence of onesubject on another with the subjectinfluenced.

There are a couple of subjects where Ioften see problems regardingclassification. They are medical legalworks and criminal trial stories. Legalworks about medical topics seem toend up in the R schedules more oftenthan they should. Keep your eyes openwhen working in this area. Crimestories can class in HV or the Kschedules. You have to carefully

determine if the work is mostly aboutthe criminal trial or about theinvestigation. The investigation willclass in HV while the trial will class inthe law schedules. Watch for a trial,jury and judge angle for the works toclass in the K’s.

Good luck and keep on classing!

George A. PragerNew York University

[email protected]

Description & Entry

Report of the Task Group onReplacement Volumes

As announced on the TS-SIS listserv(Feb. 4, 2004), the report of the TS-SIS Cataloging and ClassificationCommittee’s Task Group onReplacement Volumes has been postedto the TS website at: http://www.aallnet.org/sis/tssis/committees/cataloging/replacementvolumes/

This report has been received by theLibrary of Congress, which plans toissue a draft rule interpretationconcerning the issues involvingreplacement volumes. This draftLibrary of Congress ruleinterpretation (LCRI or RI) will beshared with the Task Group forcomment, at which time it will be madeavailable via the listserv for feedbackfrom the law cataloging community.Please be alert for messages on thelistserv announcing availability of thedraft RI, and in the meantime, take alook at the Committee’s report.

Laws of Multiple Jurisdiction

I received an interesting questionregarding choice of main entry et al.for the following title:

The Swiss federal code of obligations: with the Turkish alterations =[Spanish title and subtitle] = [Frenchtitle and subtitle] / Georg Wettstein ;Charles Jucker … [et al.]. Zurich : J.Bollmann, 1928.

Half t.p.: The Swiss federal ofobligations, indicating the alterationsmade in connection with the adoptionof this law in Turkey by GeorgWettstein …

Before we can determine main entryand the possible need for a uniformtitle, we need to determine, what is thechief aspect of this work? Is it: acompilation of laws governing morethan one jurisdiction? (Code 21.32B2)Or, is it a single main work withsubordinate texts? (RI 25.1) Or, is itchiefly a commentary on one or morelaws? (Code 21.13).

RI 25.1 instructs us to rely on thewording of the chief source todistinguish between a compilationversus one main work with lessemphasized works. Only the name of

the Swiss law is given, in large boldfaceletters; “with the Turkish alterations”could be treated as a subtitle, or as partof the title proper, but is in muchsmaller letters in lighter type. Clearly,the wording and the emphasis of thetypeface indicates that the Swiss law,not the Turkish one, is being stressed.If the names of both laws were givenin the title proper, then one would treatthe work as a compilation of lawsgoverning more than 1 jurisdiction(Code 21.32B2), and enter the workunder title main entry, with name-titleadded analytical added entries for thetwo codes.

Next, we need to decide if the workemphasizes the law or the commentary.It would be helpful if the chief sourceof information had a clearer statementof responsibility, such as “edited by”,“with a commentary by”, or “acommentary by Georg Wettstein”,rather than just giving this individual’sname. But the presentation of the nameof the Swiss code seems to present theitem as an edition of the original work,similar to examples in Code 21.13C1,“Edition of the work emphasized,”particularly the last example:“Bundesbaugesetz : mit Kommentar /H. Knaup, H. Ingenstau.” So, mainentry should be governed by Code


(Continuing resources), the first of thesources in priority order is “series titlepage.” AACR2R isn’t really clear onwhat can and cannot be considered aseries t.p. Can the cover, t.p. verso, orlist of series titles in the back of thework be considered a series t.p., if theypresent the series statement? Asclarified in the revised RI, the seriest.p. must be a “physical location withinthe bibliographic resource” either thepage opposite the analytical title pageor the page in the position of the halft.p. if the series title is present.“‘Series title page’ is not a general termimplying whatever source has theseries title (e.g., the cover or theanalytic t.p. verso is not a series titlepage).”

Title proper of series (Rule & RI1.6B1)

This rule referred you to back to12.1B1 (Continuing resources: Titleproper), which says to correct anyobvious typographical errors intranscribing the title proper. At itsSeptember 2003 meeting, The JointSteering Committee for the Revisionof AACR2 approved the revision ofthis rule to delete the reference to rule12.1B1, and approved the earlyimplementation of this revision in theUnited States, as per RI 1.6B1.

Any inaccuracy in the title proper of aseries should not be corrected, buttranscribed according to rule 1.0F1(“In an area where transcription fromthe item is required, transcribe aninaccuracy or a misspelled word as itappears on the item. Follow such aninaccuracy by [sic] or by i.e. and thecorrection within square brackets.”).

3. Conflict Resolution RI 25.5B

When deciding upon what qualifiers touse to break a conflict between thetitles of serials/series entered undertitle or name headings, generally avoidthe use of the terms “print” and “text”as qualifiers. If a title has beenpublished in multiple physical media,add a qualifier to the heading for thephysical medium that isn’t printed textor paper.

21.31B1, Laws governing onejurisdiction: “Enter laws governing onejurisdiction under the heading for thejurisdiction governed by them. Adduniform title as instructed in 25.15A.”

So far, we have determined thatSwitzerland would be the main entry.But what would be the uniform title forthe code? Luckily for us, a search inthe national authority file under theEnglish title proper of our work(though not the French or Spanishparallel titles) directs us to theauthorized name of this code:Switzerland. |t Obligationenrecht(1911). Since the work provides thetext of the code in three languages, weadd the language qualifier “Polyglot”after the name of the code. (Code25.5C1).

But what about the poor “Turkishalterations?” If we can determine thename of the Turkish law, we can use ananalytical name-title added entry. MyTurkish isn’t so good, but it looks liken 83127316 might be what we arelooking for: Turkey. |t Borclar Kanunu[diacritics omitted]. If we can’tconfirm the name of the Turkish law,then we can simply use a jurisdictionadded entry for Turkey.

Here is what we have:

110 1 Switzerland240 10 Obligationenrecht (1911). [l]Polyglot245 14 The Swiss federal code ofobligations : |b with the Turkishalterations = Codigo federal suizo delas obligaciones : con lasmodificaciones turcas = Le codefederal Suisse des obligations : texteofficial suisse francais, avec leschangements turcs / |c GeorgWettstein ; assisted by Charles Jucker… [et al.].246 31 Codigo federal suizo de lasobligaciones246 31 Code federal suisse desobligation700 1 Wettstein, Georg, |d b. 1880.710 12 Turkey. |t Borclar Kanunu.|lPolyglot.

Updated LCRIs (Nov. 2003):A Summary of Significant Changes

1.Punctuation and spacing conventions

Nearly all the conventions applicableto punctuation and spacing inbibliographic and name authorityrecords for monographs, integratingresources, and serials, have beenconveniently collocated in the newlyrevised and much expanded RI 1.0C.An initial followed by a word which isnot an initial should be followed byone space, in name authority recordsas well as bibliographic records (i.e.:D & E column, not D&E column)

The RI gives the rules for endingpunctuation in all MARC bibliographicfields, and explains the ISBD-basedreasons therefore: Fields 245 and 250must always end in periods, i.e.: 245 00 Why me?. 250 [1st ed.].

c. The rule discontinues the practiceof leaving 3 spaces when recordingholdings or open dates within anglebrackets: i.e. “<1981->, not “<1981->”. The text of the revised RI isavailable as part of the Nov. 2003update of the RIs, and a summary ofthe changes with a link to the text inPDF is posted on the Cataloging Policyand Support Office [CPSO] Web siteat URL: http://lcweb.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/01_0C.html

2. Series

a. Series published in one or morephysical media? How many series?RI 1.6 has added a section on how todetermine if single or multiple seriesexist whenever a series is published inone or more physical media.

b. What is a series title page? (RI1.6A2).When establishing the form of aseries, or deciding if it has changed,the cataloger should follow the priorityorder of sources given in section .0B2in AACR2R chapters 2-12. In chapters2 (Monographs), 5 (Music), and 12


ManagementSuggestions for Supporting,Suggestions for Supporting,Suggestions for Supporting,Suggestions for Supporting,Suggestions for Supporting,Encouraging and Empowering StaffEncouraging and Empowering StaffEncouraging and Empowering StaffEncouraging and Empowering StaffEncouraging and Empowering Staff– Reward and Encouragement Issues– Reward and Encouragement Issues– Reward and Encouragement Issues– Reward and Encouragement Issues– Reward and Encouragement Issues

Caitlin RobinsonUniversity of Iowa

[email protected]

In the previous column, we reviewedsome practical strategies for providingmembers of our staff with assistanceas they struggle to keep pace withincreasing task assignments andworkloads. Before we finish ourdiscussion, we also need to considermechanisms for reward and forextending personal support andencouragement to our co-workers.Jeffrey Pfeffer has written a thought-provoking article on reward, aimed ata business audience. 1 One of theinteresting ideas that Pfefferdiscusses is the myth that people workfor only money: “People do work formoney” he writes, “but they work evenmore for meaning in their lives. In fact,they work to have fun. Companies thatignore this fact are essentially bribingtheir employees and will pay the pricein a lack of loyalty and commitment.”We all know about chocolate,chocolate and more chocolate, butgiven institutional constraints ondirect financial reward, what else canwe do to reward and encourage ourstaff? 2 In a survey conducted a fewyears ago by the ALA Support StaffInterests Round Table, the highestranked areas of concern included lackof career ladders, compensation,responsibility/authority, reducedautonomy, and basic morale issues. 3Reward strategies and efforts toencourage and support our staff shouldbe oriented toward these concerns.

Simple Rewards

Some of the most effective, andcertainly the most immediate, rewardsare those that can be characterized as“random acts of kindness.” Examplesinclude, arranging for an ergonomicassessment for workstations, surprisetreats on a Monday morning, sharingan interesting article or, impromptu

discussions of the day’s challenges.We all know how much staff partiesbrighten a day. Group lunches canprovide an informal forum fordiscussion and sharing. Our Head ofCataloging gives small, fun trinketswhen the staff/librarian team meetstheir throughput goal for the quarter. Iknow you all have even more creativeideas.

Offering Empowerment.

Empowerment refers to giving staff notonly the responsibility for completinga task but also the authority to plan forand structure an assignment, or indeedto identify new services or changes inprocedures. Empowered staffs aregiven the autonomy to make decisions,to communicate broadly, and toconsult independently. On the face ofit, you can see why empowering staffwould be a powerful form of reward.Then why isn’t true empowermentfound in more library settings? Writingabout the challenges related toempowerment, Rosabeth MossKantner explains that, althoughmanagers usually are willing tosurrender responsibility, authority istougher to give up. Kantner notes thatempowerment requires unrestrictedaccess to three components:information, resources and support. 4Successful empowerment alsorequires a two-way street. Whilemanagers have to be comfortablesurrendering some authority, staffmust desire the autonomy and bewilling to take initiative and assumeresponsibility. Think about yourorganization; is it likely that the desireis there and the requirements could bemet? If not, does this mean we shouldavoid empowerment as a rewardoption? I don’t think so. Personally, Ibelieve in the concept of the renewing

library that Carson, Carson andPhillips describe in The ABCs ofCollaborative Change (a book Irecommend highly). 5 You can effectchange even if the overall Librarymanagement style does not embracefull empowerment goals, or if yourstaff members don’t immediately “stepup to the plate.” As Technical Servicesmanagers, we can pursue limitedempowerment goals within our ownareas, perhaps related to finiteprojects or one-time assignments.Other possible strategies include:speaking with staff about thephilosophy of empowerment,encouraging staff to embraceresponsibility, rewarding staff thattake responsibility through praise,special assignment and greaterautonomy, and talking to ouradministrators about what we’re doing,encouraging growth in other areas ofthe library.

Increasing Employee Involvement

Another reward option is to increasethe basic involvement of your staff inplanning work initiatives. Althoughthis isn’t true empowerment, it can stillprovide powerful encouragement forstaff. Increasing involvement can alsobe an excellent change mechanism. Tobe successful in increasinginvolvement,effective communica-tion is essential; so is honesty. Thereshould be no hidden agendas. If youhave an expected outcome,communicate it. Otherwise, you needto allow for input that may move theproject or task in unexpecteddirections. You should be willing toallow an outcome that may not beentirely comfortable — unless youintend to step in and snatch controlback (risking the adverse moraleimplications of that decision).


Techniques to employ includeassigning a question to a small groupfor resolution, or involving all staff indiscussion of a problem and thenbuilding consensus on a solution.

Family-friendly Policies

Remember that the definition of“family” is not limited to staff withchildren. Many of us face concernsrelated to spouses, domestic partners,or parents. This is an area in which youwant to be sure you understand theinstitutional commitment to, andpolicies regarding, family supportissues. Happily, many of ourinstitutions have embraced policiesthat offer support to staff with familycommitments. Family-friendlypolicies include flextime, flexiblescheduling, compassionate leave, job-share situations, part-time workopportunities, day care for sickchildren, and institutionally supportedday care. I recommend the work ofJennifer Glass to you; she is aprofessor of Sociology at theUniversity of Iowa who has studiedissues related to maintaining a family-responsive workplace. 6 Even if yourinstitution takes a benighted view ofthese initiatives, there is a lot that youcan do by being a compassionatemanager.

Personal Encouragement and Support

Sometimes the thorniest problems thatpresent themselves in the workplaceare the ones caused by external forces.None of us completely shed ourpersonal lives at the Library door. Beaware of what is going on, personallyas well as professionally, for yourstaff. Set aside some time each day tochat with staff as you walk by. Roam abit; observe staff interaction and noteany changes in work style orperformance. What can you do toprepare for the intrusion of a personalproblem into your workplace?

Maintain an Open Door Policy

Let the staff know that they canapproach you when they need to talk.Meet regularly with key members of

your staff and encouragecommunication to “trickle down” byasking about people who report tothem.

Don’t Ignore External Signs ThatThere May Be a Problem

Excessive absences, increasing errorrates or slumps in productivity maysignal a larger problem, and they needto be addressed in a timely, productiveway, but also with compassion. “Beforeyou act, make sure you have the facts,”should be your mantra. Investigateproblems personally and carefully.Encourage staff to share what might becausing the symptoms you’ve noted.You may not need (and they may notwant to share) the details, but you doneed enough information to allow youto act effectively. Know yourinstitutional policies. Never intervenewith a suspected drug or alcoholproblem without talking with aprofessional first.

The Details Belong to Someone Else

Express concern, close the door, offerhankies, but do not become a generalconfessor. We are not professionalcounselors and shouldn’t try to stepinto that role. We are, however, caringindividuals, and we should extendsupport to our co-workers.

Become a CommunityI n f o r m a t i o nClearinghouse

Know what resources areavailable to your staff andhow they might be utilized.When necessary, suggestor refer staff to supportservices. Seek mediationor other external helpyourself, if youexperience an intractableproblem. Encourage staffin their efforts to seekhelp, and support them

with flexible scheduling if possible.

Manage Difficult Personalities

I recently attended a seminar onstrategies for dealing with people who

exhibit inappropriate reactions toroutine work situations. Onesuggestion for coping will be familiarto many parents, “time-outs.” When astaff member is spinning out ofcontrol, immediately trying to workthe problem may be counterproductive.Ask the individual to take a break andleave the area. Set a specific time toaddress the problem. When there isinappropriate behavior in theworkplace, it needs to be addressedquickly. Extreme anger is neverappropriate in a work setting. Seekexternal assistance if the behaviorrecurs frequently or appears to beexhibiting as a pattern.

There are ample reasons to considerchanging your management techniquesand strategies. Change should takepractical form in response to aperceived need or an expressedconcern. Try the assessment steps andsee what information you glean aboutinstitutional commitment, and staffconcerns. Take baby steps. Try a one-shot project that is configured in adifferent way. Begin to apply “randomacts of kindness.” Think aboutempowerment or increase staffinvolvement in decision-making. Letyour compassion show. Finally, shareyour successes (and, if you’re feelingstrong, your failures). We all have a lotto learn from each other.

Endnotes1 Pfeffer, Jeffrey. “Six Dangerous Myths About

Pay.” Harvard Business Review v.76:no.3(1998:May/June) pp.108-119

2 Ibid., p.112.3 American Library Association. Support Staff

Interests Round Table. “Summary ofSurvey to Determine Top Three Issues ofConcern to Support Staff.” http://www.ala.org/ala/lssirt/lssirtstratplan/issuessurvey/Results.pdf 1998

4 Kanter, Rosabeth Moss. The Change Masters.New York: Touchstone, 1983.

5 Carson, Kerry David, Paula Phillips Carson,Joyce Schouest Phillips. The ABCs ofCollaborative Change: The Manager’sGuide to Library Renewal. Chicago:American Library Association, 1997

6 For example: Glass, Jennifer. “Envisioning theIntegration of Family and Work: Toward aKinder, Gentler Workplace.” Contempor-ary Sociology v.29:iss.1 (2000:Jan.), pp.129-144.


This year started the same way last yeardid, with lively debate on discussionlists such as AUTOCAT and MARCabout a column written by Roy Tennantin the January issue of Library Journal.He modified his year-old predictionthat MARC must die <http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/ca250046>. Instead, he has decidedthat we can “let MARC die of old agerather than homicide” <http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/ca371079>. He thinks librarians areisolating ourselves because we relyupon MARC while the rest of theinformation world uses XML and avariety of other metadata schemes.

As a law librarian with too little timeto learn about everything ofimportance, once again I felt lost in asea of acronyms. Just how does XMLrelate to MARC? What are MODS andMETS? The importance of XML wasreinforced for me when I openedWordPerfect 11 on my brand-newcomputer to start writing this column.There under File was the usual optionto create a new document and a newoption to create a new XML document.XML is obviously part of our present,not just out there in our future.

Fortunately, there was a wonderfullyhelpful session at ALA Midwinter thisyear. At every ALA meeting, theALCTS/LITA MARC Formats InterestGroup meets on Saturday afternoon.This year’s agenda was a presentationcalled MARC and XML: NewInitiatives in Metadata Standards.The speaker was Rebecca Guenther,Senior Networking and StandardSpecialist for the NetworkDevelopment and MARC StandardsOffice of the Library of Congress.With this column, I will report on herpresentation in hopes that this will add

to your understanding of XML andhow it relates to MARC. Though I willnot use quotation marks in the rest ofthis article, all of the good intellectualcontent is hers; all of the inaccuraciesare mine.

When I asked Rebecca for a copy ofher slides and asked if she would objectto my using them as the basis for acolumn, she said that she was pleasedbecause there are lots ofmisconceptions that she would like tosee corrected. Her list of thesemisconceptions includes thefollowing: MARC records must useAACR2 and LCRI, MARC isincomprehensible because of itsnumeric tags and defined syntax,MARC is dying because the world ingoing to XML, and MARC is dyingbecause institutions are choosingother descriptive standards.

In reality, none of these are true.Instead, MARC has been terrificallysuccessful. There are a limitednumber of MARC formats usedaround the world and they are all verysimilar. In addition more and morenational formats have converted toMARC21, the format used in theUnited States. MARC’s numeric tagsfree us of the difficulties of translatingfrom one language into another andcarry a large amount of meaning. Thereare thousands of systems using MARC,containing more than one billionMARC records. This standard allowslibraries everywhere to share recordsbecause the content is predictable.

Two other things are happening at thesame time. First, an increasing numberof metadata standards are beingcreated to meet a variety of needs. Inaddition to MARC there is an alphabetsoup of others: MODS, Dublin Core,

ONIX, EAD, GILS, TEI Header, andmore. Second, the XML (ExtensibleMarkup Language) schema hasbecome the markup for the Web andthe exchange medium of choice. Notonly is it simple and extremelyflexible, but a large number of freelyavailable tools are being developed forits use.

We can take advantage of thesedevelopments in a variety of ways. TheLibrary of Congress is working on aframework so that MARC recordsmight be exchanged in XML, calledMARCXML. If you know MARC,MARCXML is actually readable. Withthis process records would go to andfrom MARC21 and MARCXMLwithout losing any data. (The real termfor this is lossless/roundtripconversion.) MARCXMLwould allow MARC21 touse XML programmingtools and presentationstyle sheets, while ourcatalogs would continueto contain MARC records. Anadded advantage is that the XMLschema would not need regularchanges in order to accommodatechanges in MARC21. <See http://www.loc.gov/standards/marcxml forinformation about this development,including examples of records inMARCXML.>

Another development by the Libraryof Congress is MODS (MetadataObject Description Schema). It isbeing designed for library applications,although it could have other uses. Ituses the XML schema and is aderivative subset of MARC elements.Especially designed for complexdigital objects, it is richer than DublinCore but simpler than full MARC. Ituses natural language instead of

Susan GoldnerUniversity of Arkansas, Little Rock

[email protected]

MARC RemarksWill XML Kill MARC?Will XML Kill MARC?Will XML Kill MARC?Will XML Kill MARC?Will XML Kill MARC?


OCLCDarcy L. Jones

Mercer [email protected]

OCLC Connexion – PlannedEnhancements

According to the OCLC Connexionweb site (http://oclc.org/connexion/),OCLC is planning severalenhancements for the Connexionclient. Authority searchingenhancements include capabilities forauthority numeric and derived keysearching, as well as root/expandedauthority results. Additionally, OCLCplans to provide the ability for librariesto share bibliographic and authorityrecords for review with other librariesand Program for CooperativeCataloging trainers and reviewers forNACO, BIBCO, CONSER, and funnel

numeric tags. It may be used in Z39.50Next Generation (ZING – what a greatacronym!). MODS can be packagedwith electronic resources and thus canbe used in harvesting them. Althoughmore user friendly than MARC, the twoare compatible and could reside in acatalog together. MODS is currentlybeing used by several projects such asthe e-books being made freelyavailable by the University ofCalifornia Press. (For more go tohttp://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/.)

Finally, I will touch on METS(Metadata Coding and TransmissionStandard). It was an initiative of thedigital Library Federation and is nowmaintained by the Library of Congress(see http://www.loc.gov/standards/mets). It is a wrapper that containsdescriptive, administrative, andstructural metadata along with a digitallibrary object and it allows for theexpression of the complex linksbetween the various types of metadata.(In case you are wondering,administrative metadata includes

things such as technical information,source, digital provenance and rights.)METS allows libraries to exchangedigital resources along with the varietyof information needed to use them.MARCXML, MODS and Dublin Corehave been approved for use as thedescriptive scheme in METS. Thereare a number of institutions usingMETS for current projects, includingOxford University for its DigitalLibrary.

It appears that these new developmentsdo not threaten MARC after all.MARC can use XML as a carrier sothat it can be shared using standardtechniques. In the future that Guentherand others predict, MARC will not bereplaced by other metadata standards,but will live with them as a full, richcousin. Because other metadataschemes will fill needs in ways thatMARC cannot, we will have to expandour knowledge and our catalogs toinclude many of these other standardsin addition to MARC. By doing so,librarians can play an important role

in the future of informationmanagement.

The discussions resulting fromTennant’s article show that noteveryone agrees that other metadataschemes should live in our catalogsalongside MARC. Neither do all agreethat XML is the exchange medium weshould be moving toward. But Tennantand Guenther both seem to see thesetwo changes in our future.

I do have to disagree with Tennant whenhe surmises that librarians will have adifficult time adapting to standards inaddition to MARC. We’ve learned tolive with and think in MARC, eventhough there is noting intuitive aboutit. We are masters at understanding thevalue of cooperating so that we canshare information. We should be ableto keep our MARC records and stillparticipate in new, innovative ways oforganizing knowledge. It seems to methat we can quote a currentpresidential contender and say “Bringit on!”

Some Updates from the Ever-Some Updates from the Ever-Some Updates from the Ever-Some Updates from the Ever-Some Updates from the Ever-Changing World of OCLC…Changing World of OCLC…Changing World of OCLC…Changing World of OCLC…Changing World of OCLC…

projects. The dates for theseenhancements have not yet beenscheduled.

Professional Development:OCLC’s Web Information Sessions

In the professional developmentportion of the OCLC web site, OCLCoffers free live information sessions.Information about these sessions isavailable at http://www.oclc.org/education/websessions/default.htm.Upcoming sessions will cover OCLC’sILLiad product on March 2, 2004, andMarch 18, 2004, from 1:00pm –2:00pm (eastern). You can also learnmore about OCLC’s CatalogingPartners Program on March 4, 2004

from 3:00pm – 4:00pm, or on March10, 2004 from 11:00am -12:00pm.

Keeping Up to Date: OCLC’sElectronic Publications

OCLC provides a weekly summary thatincludes service news, tips, and eventreminders for OCLC members. Youcan sign up for this service at http://www5.oclc.org/downloads/design/abstracts/subscribe.htm.

Last, but not least, an update on theOCLC Committee Open Discussion atAALL in Boston…The open discussion is currentlyscheduled for Sunday afternoon, July


Research & PublicationsChris Long

Indiana University , [email protected]

11, from 4:15pm – 5:15pm. I amcurrently working with NancyLensenmeyer, our new SIS liaison, to

In the Money!

I recently read a study in which facultymembers were surveyed about theirresearch activities. One sectioninvolved perceived obstacles to doingresearch. Very few professors listedlack of time as a hindrance, but manymentioned lack of funding. As Ipondered this, it occurred to me thatthe opposite is true for most lawlibrarians. If a similar survey were tobe taken of law librarians (hmm,there’s an idea), my best guess wouldbe that our number one obstacle wouldbe lack of time. Even in these leantimes, though, we are blessed with anabundance of funding sources, so thiscolumn will direct you to some placesyou can go to support your research.

The first place that comes to mind isright within our own SISes. The TS andOBS SISes provide the JointResearch Grant, an award up to$1000 each year. Virtually anyonereading this publication would beeligible to apply and the criteria are notvery confining—you simply need toshow how your project will benefit,either directly or indirectly, technicalservices law librarianship. The grantcould be used not only for majorexpenses like travel, but also forresearch costs we often overlook, likepostage and copying. Seewww.aallnet.org/sis/obssis/research/researchinfo.htm for moreinformation.

Another source within AALL is theAALL Research Grant. AALL’s

Research Committee awardsup to $5000 per year<www.aallnet.org/about/

grant_application.asp>, and the grantcan cover a wide range of expenses,including travel, supplies, and evenequipment rental. Preference is givento AALL members, and you can workeither individually or collaborate witha colleague. Don’t know what to writeabout? Consult the AALL ResearchAgenda <www.aallnet.org/committee/research/agenda.asp>. Although itdoes not specifically address technicalservices issues, Ellen McGrath hasdone a nice job of culling possible techservices issues from the agenda<www.aallnet.org/sis/tssis/tsll/28-04/res-pub.htm>.

Knowing some AALL members alsobelong to ALA or SLA, I exploredfunding sources from thoseassociations. ALA offers a number ofresearch-related grants for itsmembers <www.ala.org/Template.cfm?Section=grantfellowship>. Oneof particular interest is the SamuelLazerow Fellowship, which providesa $1000 cash award to librarians fortravel or writing in the fields ofcollections and technical services,although the compilation of biblio-graphies is not supported. For thoseinterested in creating bibliographiesand other library resource guides, ALAawards up to $5000 for these types ofprojects through the Carnegie-Whitney Grant. In scanning the listof past winners, I did not see any lawlibrarians, so if you are a dual memberof AALL and ALA and have an idea fora bibliography, this might be a goodopportunity.

If you are a member of SLA and havean ambitious project in mind, you canapply for the Steven I. GoldspielMemorial Research Fund< w w w . s l a . o r g / c o n t e n t /memberserv ice / researchforum/goldspiel/index.cfm>. We are talkingbig money here—some recent awardshave been almost $20,000. Don’t havequite that big of a project? Don’t fret,they also encourage projects withsmaller budgets. In the SLA ResearchStatement, “methods of informationaccess” is one of their core areas ofinterest—right up our alley!

Another place to look for fundingresources is in your own backyard.Most academic institutions have adepartment that helps faculty and staffwith research funding issues.Sometimes the resources closest tohome are ones we know the least about.I am living proof of that. When Istarted looking for what my ownuniversity has, I found a wealth ofinformation that I did not even knowexisted. Let me highlight a couple ofthe ones I found most useful—maybeyour institution has them too.ResearchResearch <www.researchresearch.com> has a section in whichgrant opportunities are arranged bysubject. The library science sectionlisted 142 grants and the libraryautomation section listed almost 200,although I would imagine there isconsiderable overlap between the twocategories. The Community ofScience database <http://fundingopps.cos.com>, although notas easy to search, also had an extensivelisting of library research grants.

line up an OCLC product manager tospeak at our committee meeting inBoston. If you would like any specific

information discussed at this meeting,please let me know your requests, andI’ll pass them along.


Serials

Christina TarrUniversity of California, Berkeley

[email protected]

Margaret McDonaldUniversity of San Diego

[email protected]

The following serial title changes wererecently identified by the Universityof San Diego Legal Research Centerserials staff and the University ofCalifornia, Berkeley Law Librarycataloging staff:

Crime and delinquency in California1965-2001(OCoLC 1565417)Changed to:Crime in California (Sacramento,Calif. : 2003)2002-(OCoLC 53475461)Also available online at http://caag.state.ca.us/cjsc/publications/candd/pub.html

Crime and delinquency in California.Advance release-2001?(OCoLC 10919355)Changed to:Crime in California. Advance release2002-(OCoLC 52881885)

Dickinson law reviewVol. 13, no. 1 (Oct. 1908)-v. 107, no.4 (spring 2003)(OCoLC 3737756)Changed to:Penn State law reviewVol. 108, no. 1 (summer 2003)-(OCoLC 52761478)

Elder’s advisor (New York, N.Y.)Vol. 1, no. 1 (summer 1999)-v. 4, no.3 (winter 2003)(OCoLC 40813091)

Changed to:Marquette elder’s advisorVol. 5, no. 1 (fall 2003)-(OCoLC 53838111)

European Investment Bank. Annualreport1958-2000(OCoLC 1568453)Changed to:EIB Group. Annual report2000(OCoLC 20224745)Merged with:European Investment Bank. The EIBGroup in the year ...2000(OCoLC 4766910)To form:EIB Group. EIB Group activity report2001-(OCoLC 50629135)

Journal of taxation of financialinstitutionsVol. 14, no. 1 (Sept./Oct. 2000)-v. 16,no. 6 (July/Aug. 2003)(OCoLC 45003980)Changed to:Journal of taxation and regulationof financial institutionsVol. 17, no. 1 (Sept./Oct. 2003)(OCoLC 53003562)

Transboundary resources reportVol. 1, no. 1 (spring 1987)-v. 12, no. 1(1999)(OCoLC 16722880)Changed to:

Utton Center reportVol. 1, no. 1 (spring 2002)-(OCoLC 49888055)Also available online via the WorldWide Web at: http://lawschool.unm.edu/utton/

University of Chicago Law SchoolroundtableVol. 1993-v. 9, no. 1 (2002)(OCoLC 30325582)Beginning with vol. 4, no. 1 (spring2003), absorbed by:Chicago journal of international law(OCoLC 43608525)

Widener law symposium journalVol. 1, no. 1 (spring 1996)-v. 9, issue2 (2003)(OCoLC 34916031)Changed to:Widener law reviewVol. 10, issue 1 (2003)-(OCoLC 53973102)

The following serial cessations wereidentified by the University of SanDiego Legal Research Center serialsstaff and the University of California,Berkeley Law Library acquisitionsstaff:

American Bar Association. Section ofIntellectual Property Law. AnnualreportCeased publication in print formatwith: 1999/2000?(OCoLC 29579457)Still available on CD-ROM

By my count (and I was certainly nomath major), this column has listedover $30,000 worth of grant moneyjust waiting for you to apply for it.Now that’s “a lot of what it takes to getalong!”

Hall of Acclaim

Recent publications by our colleagues:Catherine F. Halvorsen and Diana C.Jaque. “Keeping Up With New LegalTitles.” Law Library Journal 95:4Dianne Oster, “Technical Services SIS

Keeps Members, SubspecialtiesConnected.” AALL SpectrumDecember 2003.

If you have had an article publishedrecently, please let me know so I caninclude you in future Halls of Acclaim.


Annuaire de la magistratureCeased with: 2000 ed.

Brookings reviewCeased with: Vol. 21, no. 4 (fall2003)(OCoLC 8853284)

Electronic communication law reviewCeased with: Vol. 9, no 4 (2002)(OCoLC 50483619)

Gay & lesbian law journalBegan and ended with: Vol. 10 (May2001).(OCoLC 50059590)

Mezhdunarodnoe pravo = InternationallawCeased with: 12 = 2001:3 (mai-iiun2001)(OCoLC 48545772)

Outline of Japanese taxesCeased with: 2003Apparently from 2004 will be availableat publisher’s website

Praxis juridique et religion : PJRCeased with: Vol 15, no. 2 (1998)(OCoLC 11824408)

Research advisorCeased with: No. 23 (Apr. 2003)(OCoLC 32714811)

Revue burkinabè de droitCeased with: No. 39-40 (2001)(OCoLC 15243234)

Revue internationale de laconcurrence = International reviewof competition lawCeased with: 2002, nr. 3 (Dec. 2002)(OCoLC 7318199)From 2003, available exclusively onthe Internet at: http://www.ligue.org/main.html

Saint Louis-Warsaw transatlanticlaw journalCeased with: v. 2001-2002(OCoLC 33316909)

State constitutional law bulletinCeased with: vol. 16, no. 10 (July2003)(OCoLC 17450128)

Supreme Court Historical Society.Annual reportCeased in paper with: 2000.(OCoLC 8550033)Available online from 2001 at: http://www.supremecourthistory.org/

Update (Human Rights Watch(Organization)Ceased with: fall 2000(OCoLC 48765350)

Virginia.Supreme Court. Casesdecided in the Supreme Court ofVirginiaCeased with: Vol. 260 (June-Nov.2000)(OCoLC 3473446)

Who’s who in CongressCeased with: 2001 ed.(OCoLC 23021609)

Subject Headings

Aaron [email protected]

Metadata, Dublin Core,Metadata, Dublin Core,Metadata, Dublin Core,Metadata, Dublin Core,Metadata, Dublin Core,and Subject Catalogingand Subject Catalogingand Subject Catalogingand Subject Catalogingand Subject Catalogingororororor, Dilbert goes to Library School, Dilbert goes to Library School, Dilbert goes to Library School, Dilbert goes to Library School, Dilbert goes to Library School

It is very hard to avoid hearing aboutof Metadata, Dublin Core or proposalsto replace MARC (or perhaps LCSHor even the idea of cataloging) withsomething more modern that would bebetter, more efficient, more up to date,and less “uncool.” What’s in it for us?Should we be afraid? What harm willit do us? Are our jobs threatened? Willthis open up new areas for subjectcatalogers to market their services? Isthere any substance behind the buzzwords?

Metadata is “data about data.” It isdefined by the “Dublin Core” (shortfor: Dublin Metadata Core ElementSet), a project that started out with aconference at the OCLC offices inDublin (Ohio). “Data” about “data”could mean for example, subject

headings encoded by means ofalphabetical characters using a featherdipped in ink, written on a 3” by 5” cardwith a hole centered in the bottom, thatis accessed with an individual’spersonal non-mechanical biologicaloptical scanner (“Eyes 1.0”), whichthen leads the user to the other data,such as a book presumably shelved inthe stacks. Sometimes metadata isembedded (attached) with the data itdescribes, such as a call number on thespine of a book shelved according tosubject-oriented classificationsystem. Somehow this soundsfamiliar.

The problem that should be obviouswith the above definition is that itwould lead to very obsolete, not tomention “old fashioned,” things being

considered “metadata.” It would leadto the conclusion the metadataspecialists are really catalogers, whichis unacceptable since metadataspecialists are by definition younger,cooler and better paid. Therefore oneoften sees the definition of metadataamended to include a requirement thatthe metadata and the data that metadatadescribes be machine readable,electronic, or digital resources (somuch for the idea of a system notbased on “carrier” or format.”)

The Dublin Core was developed in themid-1990s in part as an attempt to“tame the web” (or at least to be ableto find things better.) It defines datafields used to describe resources(books are the most common“resource” but don’t tell the metadata


people that, it would hurt theirfeelings). The fields in question arequite generic, and look like the sort ofthings one would expect to find in a,uh, library catalog record. Those thatdon’t parallel fields now governed byAACR2, LCC and LCSH, includeadditional information on location,access control, and special equipmentneeds that in the past were forced intonote field, indicated by using colorcatalog cards, or perhaps written on theback of the card (e.g. this book is inthe director’s office and can only beloaned to members of the board ofdirectors.) While the metadata record,especially when used with electronicresources can have some functionsbeyond those usually performed bylibrary catalogs, for subject catalogersit makes very little difference. Ametadata record looks like somethinginvented by a bunch of catalogers,which isn’t far from the truth.

The metadata standard includes a fieldfor subject data. Nothing in the DublinCore requires using LCSH, but it doesencourage the use of controlledvocabulary and a systematic

classification. LCSH is the mostcomprehensive controlled vocabularyavailable, and seems to be the one mostmetadata people have in mind. Thealternative would be to use keywords(which works only for a narrowsubject, and fails miserably when usedfor a body of data that spans multipletimes or cultures).

An interesting variant is “FAST” (Facetapplication of subject authority)reported on in a several scholarlypapers. While it claims to havesomething to do with Metadata, inreality it is about some changes inLCSH that aren’t that radical andprobably should have beenimplemented when online catalogsbecame common, e.g. changes insubdivision practices most of whichmake no difference in a world ofOPACs. Even the radical changes inchronological subdivision suggestedwould require only a reasonableupgrade of OPACs. They seem to feelthat the difficulty of applying LCSHhas to do with the complexity of theheading syntax, but one could arguethat the real difficulty pertains to the

ability to analyze the books (resources,documents, websites, or perhapscodices, manuscripts or tablets) andrelate their contents to the controlledvocabulary. Teaching someone to applyLCSH and create headings is less of achallenge than teaching the substantiveknowledge that underlies subjectcataloging.

My conclusion (definitely mine, notthe policy of any institution I have everworked for, or hope to work for) is that“metadata” is pure buzzword. If youlook at the term independent of the“carrier,” it is cataloging. From theperspective of subject cataloging, itmakes no difference whether onediscusses scrolls being indexed in ahandwritten list, or digital resourcesin a web based OPAC. Should we ascatalogers aspire to be called“metadata specialists?” Of course,especially if we get more respect andmore money from naïve and deludedmanagers – but we should rememberthat we are still catalogers doing whatcatalogers have been doing forcenturies.

the tornado that swept through arecords management facility of theUniversity of Missouri in November1998. <http://palimpsest.stan-ford.edu/bytopic/disasters/>

The beauty of surfing is findingcountless leads to other material onyour topic. The Stanford site listsDartmouth College Library as a sourcefor treating wet books. Once at theDartmouth site, you find a verythorough Simple Book Repair Manualwith excellent illustrations and evenwith some videos. (The videos werevery small on my PC.) Topics coveredin the manual include, among them,guiding principles, setting up therepair area, parts of a book, practicalguidelines, a glossary, and abibliography. <http://www.dartmouth.edu/~preserve/repair/repairindex.htm>

The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign also has a site forProcedures and Treatments Used forBook Repair and Pamphlet Binding.Among the pamphlet topics arebinding, adding envelopes, sewnpamphlets, disbinding and rebinding,and loose-leaf binding. Among thepaper repairs and treatments are pagemending, tape removal, formingsignatures, and page cutting. Bookrepairs include recasing a book block,replacing a book spine, add/makingpockets in books, and tightening loosehinges. This site has hundreds of colorphotos and a disclaimer. The site seeksto illustrate book repairs, but it doesnot consider itself to substitute for thetraining of a professional. <http://gateway.library.uiuc.edu/preserve/procedures.html>

The Book Arts Web book repairprocedures state basically the sameposition as the University of Illinois.

Its instructions for repairs were writtenas an adjunct to all-day demonstrationsshown at the 1998 Annual Meeting ofthe American Library Association.Here, too, there are good illustrations.<h t tp : / /www.ph i lob ib lon .com/bkrepair/BookRepair.html>

In addition to book repairs, the BookArts Web gives an extensive list ofsuppliers. Those seriously interestedin book binding will be fascinated bywhat is listed. Although most of us willnot have as intense an involvement inthe bindery process, it is interestingto see what supplies our binderiesmight utilize. I was particularlycaptivated by a product called Binderyin a Box which contains a sewingframe, laying press, plough, andnipping press all in one. <http://www.philobiblon.com/suppliers.htm>

In this surfing experience, we havebeen to Dallas (Amigos), California

PreservPreservPreservPreservPreservaaaaationtiontiontiontion(continued from page 1)


(Stanford), New Hampshire(Dartmouth), to name a few. If you goto any of the URL’s, you will find

numerous links to pursue. And this isjust the beginning (or almost the begin-

The OBS-SIS/TS-SIS ResearchRoundtable was held on Sunday, July13, from 11:45 - 1:15 pm. Chris Longof the Indiana University School ofLaw served as moderator for the groupof eleven interested participants.

Long opened the Roundtable withintroductions. Participants shared who

they were, where theywere from, theirpositions, and theirfavorite authors.Mystery fans were wellrepresented. Followingintroductions, therewere reports on theTSLL Indexing Project,the OBS/TS JointResearch Grant, theAALL Research

Agenda, rounded out by generaldiscussion of research and publishing.

Susan Goldner, University of Arkansasat Little Rock, reported on the TSLLIndexing Project: a grant-fundedproject to index TSLL. With the grant,Goldner and her co-recipient, LorraineLorne, purchased CINDEX indexingsoftware. For the past two years,Goldner, Lorne, and now newparticipant Virginia Bryant have beendeveloping the index, using CINDEXto create a database.

Initially, Goldner and company soughta thesaurus of subject headingssuitable for the project. They couldn’tfind anything specific enough; neitherwere any existing TSLL indexesspecific enough to serve as source.Therefore, they have had to buildsubject headings as they went along.They researched indexing standards,citing a NISO technical report as one

useful model. Gradually, they workedout the rules for citation and indexlayout, producing a useful documentcalled “TSLL Index Rules.” As theygathered issues of TSLL, they alsoencountered some surprises; forexample, some early years had onlythree rather than four issues. Goldnerreported that she likes producing twoseparate indexes, one of authors andtitles, and another of subject headings.These indexes can be created side-by-side and then merged to create acombined index. The softwareincludes configuration that makes iteasy to load on the web.

Although Goldner reported thatprogress has not been as swift as shemight have liked, a full 6 of the 25volumes of TSLL have been indexed,with Volume 26 completed first. Acurrent proposal is to make a 30 yearindex, with target release date twoyears from now.

The TSLL Indexing Project provokedinterest at the Roundtable not only forits potential as an outstanding tool forTSLL readers and researchers, but alsoas an example of successful andinspiring grant-funded research. Theproject has also generated some widerinterest. Hein has contacted Goldnerregarding potential publication of theindex, even if it is to be separatelypublished on the web at the TSLL site.Goldner has also used the software forindexing Annual Meeting proceedings.Another possible application isindexing the Arkansas BarAssociation’s new edition of its formbook.

Following Goldner’s presentation,Eloise Vondruska, Northwestern

University Law Library, current chairof the OBS/TS Joint Research GrantCommittee, reported on the pastactivities and future goals of thecommittee. Vondruska encouraged allRoundtable attendees to visit—and toencourage colleagues to visit— thecommittee website at http://www.aallnet.org/sis/obssis/research/for details on grant funding. Grantapplications are heartily encouraged.The application is also available onlineat: http://www.aallnet.org/sis/obssis/research/agreement.htm

Vondruska explained some ofelements of the grant process. Thecommittee shares grant applicationswith the heads of the two specialinterest sections, and has up to $2,000per year available for grant funding. Inthe past year, there were noapplications, so the committee will bere-doubling efforts to encourageapplications. Vondruska reassured theRoundtable that the only requirementof grant recipients is to report back tothe sections.

The Roundtable brainstormed aboutOBS/TS grants and potential funding.

Brian Striman, University of Nebraska-Lincoln College of Law, suggested thatone good means of generating grantideas is to attend programs at theAnnual Meeting with an open mindtoward possibilities suggested by thediscussions.

Chris Long added that it’s possible thatso few applications were filed becausewe just don’t think about all the thingsthat the money could be used for,including travel, supplies, andphotocopying.

CONFERENCE REPORT

Nancy BabbUniversity at Buffalo

[email protected]

Research Roundtable Report

ning). As we all know, the web is grow-ing exponentially. Have a great ride!


Long shared another idea: e-mail theeditors and see what they suggest foryour ideas. The editors, Long pointedout, have a very good sense of theirjournals and their audience, and manyjournals are looking for copy.

The discussion of First HaveSomething to Say led into theRoundtable’s open discussion, inwhich participants shared theirresearch progress and ideas.

David Bratman, Stanford University,shared his idea for combining personalliterary interests with current issues intechnical services. Bratman said thathe is thinking about explaining FRBRto the reader communities of authorshe likes, telling them how the catalogwill be impacted, and how theauthorities will look.

Diana Jacque, University of SouthernCalifornia, responded positively to thequestion of who is on a publication andtenure track and how they like it.Jacque said that she likes the challengeand feels ready for the next level.Jacque is review editor for LLJ andshared encouragement for others tosubmit reviews. Conference reports,said Jacque, are also a good place to start.

Marilyn Nicely, University ofOklahoma Law Library, discussedsome of her current research ideas,which include XML and issuesregarding conversion (SGML, HTML)and preservation.

Susan Goldner reported that LC hassoftware to download for convertingMARC and XML.

Carol Collins, University of TennesseeLaw Library, stated that she workingon a survey about consortia and lawlibraries. Collins also describedanother project in development, inwhich she is looking at and comparinglaw library web pages, consideringcriteria and best practices.

David Bratman mentioned that theAALL Guide, PublicationOpportunities for Law Librarians,was published several years ago.Bratman said that the PublicationsCommittee is currently reviewing the

From OBS/TS Grant Research, theRoundtable moved to AALL Researchand grant funding. Ellen McGrath,University at Buffalo, the new chair ofthe AALL Research Committee, sharedinformation about the researchcommittee and its research agenda.McGrath distributed copies of herguest column in TSLL: 28(4), in whichshe explained the AALL ResearchAgenda and gave special highlight toways in which the agenda might beadapted for technical services. Thecolumn is available online at: http://www.aallnet.org/sis/tssis/tsll/28-04/res-pub.htm or http://www.aallnet.org/sis/tssis/tsll/28-04/28-04.pdf

At the Roundtable, McGrathelaborated on these issues, includingthe desire to promote grants fortechnical services. Last year, thecommittee gathered research aboutprevious publications on agenda topics.This year, said McGrath, thecommittee will brainstorm about howto develop the agenda for the future.McGrath pointed out that the researchagenda is a good source for researchideas that AALL would like to seeexplored. Anyone who is looking forresearch suggestions would do well toconsult the agenda for inspirationtoward topics that need researching andwould likely find publication.

McGrath also stated that thecommittee works closely with the LawLibrary Journal; research can oftenbe turned into publications. FrankHoudek, editor of LLJ, had a messagefor McGrath to share with theRoundtable: he is always open to ideasfor publication, and is especiallyinterested in publishing more articlesrelated to technical services. McGrathshared Houdek’s encouragement;interested writers may contact him, viamail, or e-mail at [email protected].

Roundtable participants agreed thatHoudek provides great encouragementand support to writers.

Brian Striman stated that Houdek isvery open and easy to work with.Striman highly recommended workingwith him on LLJ articles.

Chris Long invited submissions forTSLL, as well. He encouraged peopleto e-mail him at [email protected] withideas, and stated that he welcomesguest columnists.

As a final note, McGrath reminded theRoundtable that grants can be given forany amount. Potential recipientsshouldn’t dismiss the possibility ofgrant funding for their research. Theyshould feel free to contact theResearch Committee with ideas andquestions. Contact information, theresearch agenda, grant applications,press releases about past recipients,and other information are all availableonline at the committee website: http://www.aallnet.org/committee/research/

The Roundtable next moved todiscussion of the writing process,stimulated by Walt Crawford’s newbook, First Have Something to Say.Chris Long shared a copy of the June2003 Cites & Highlights, whichreprints Crawford’s first chapter. Longhighlighted Crawford’s “reasons not towrite” — for money, for fame andglory — and “reasons to write” — forpromotion and tenure, because youhave something to say. TheRoundtable discussed these reasonsand ways to pursue success in writing.

Long stated that we often don’t giveourselves enough credit and think thatpeople won’t be interested in what wehave to way.

Brian Striman agreed, and pointed outthat people like Long, McGrath,Houdek, and other committee mem-bers and editors are great resources forthose uncertain as to whether or notan idea would make a good article.Brainstorming and feedback, stressedStriman, are very valuable.

Striman also noted that the minutiae-orientation of technical services maymake article development seem moredifficult. Among other ideas, Strimansuggested beginning with a column fora newsletter — for example, a “tips”column. Keep thinking outside thebox, encouraged Striman, and keepchallenging yourself to find a way to publish.


guide for possible updating; he issuggesting a searchable web databaseas an alternative.

Other topics discussed as potentialresearch ideas included preservationand security, mirror sites for data, and

technical services needs and budgetchallenges.

The meeting closed with the awardingof a door prize: a copy of WaltCrawford’s book. Diana Jacque wasthe appreciative winner. TheRoundtable joined in commending

Ellen McGrath for suggesting the doorprize.

Chris Long adjourned the roundtablewith thoughts of next year in Boston.Next year, said Long, the committeewill invite Frank Houdek and DavidSelden to participate in the Roundtable.

OBS-SIS Activities and Products

Worthwhile OK Not worth time

OBS programs at annual meeting 48 3 0TSLL newsletter 53 0 0OBS Website 29 15 6OBS electronic list 32 17 3Law Library Local Systems Directory 14 26 9Paperback Exchange at Activities Table 12 26 10OBS/TS Joint Research Grant 29 15 6Joint Reception at AALL annual mtg. 36 10 3

OBS Website:

Twenty-five very positive commentson the OBS Website were received.We have only Anne Myers to thank forher devotion to keeping it in such goodshape. Here are a few of thecomments:

Uncluttered and well organizedNice look: banner for new thingsis goodEasy to navigate and completeClean structure with a good effortto keep it up to dateNew organization is great. Likesthe historical information and linksto relevant vendors, discussionlists, etc.Clean, well designed. Love theWebsite of the monthOrganization and layout is clearand concise—I can find everythingvery easilyNeat and inviting

Very attractive and easy to use;updated regularlyCrisp, clear, very well organizedGreat source for resources; greatdesign, quite up to dateOffers a wealth of informationNice selection of contentpresented in a relativelyuncluttered manner

Six recommended changes for theWebsite were:

Make the annual meeting activitiesa bigger feature and on front pageMake it more dynamic withupdates from OCLC, RLIN,MARBI, etc.Add the Local Systems DirectoryAdd links to MARC, MARBI,NISO, etc.Add a roster of past OBS boardmembers

Technical Services Law Librarian

We must give a great thank you to JoeThomas, Linda Tesar, Cindy May andour many excellent contributingeditors for this outstandingpublication.

Relevant?Very Moderately NotAcquisitions 17 25 9Classification 38 13 0Collection Development 12 24 13Description and Entry 37 10 3The Internet 27 22 1MARC Remarks 34 16 2Management Issues 28 17 4OCLC 30 17 4

Preservation 6 27 17Research and Publication 6 31 14RLIN 9 10 31Serials Issues 34 16 1Subject Headings 37 12 2

Comments on TSLL:

Add a column on interesting thingspeople are doing with technologyand online catalogs, systemvendors, patron information, etc.It’s an amazing, beautiful andinvaluable publication.Stop printing TSLL and go to e-only.I wish Miss Manager would comeback!

How OBS Can Serve You Better

TSLL should come out more often.Create ways of including law firmlibrarians with systems surveys,catalog upgrades, shared MCLEcataloging recordsPost more on the OBS e-list.Perhaps like “From the Desk ofSusan Fox.” Make the membersmore aware of what the board isworking on.Make it easier to become involvedin OBS, especially for those whocan’t attend the annual meeting.Continue to offer excellentprograms at the annual meeting

Committee Work

Twenty-three members volunteered toserve on OBS committees and sevenmembers offered to run for officers.

Georgia BriscoeOBS Vice Chair/Chair Elect

2004 OBS Survey Results2004 OBS Survey Results2004 OBS Survey Results2004 OBS Survey Results2004 OBS Survey Results(continued from back page)


Nonprofit Org.U.S. Postage

PAIDPermit No. 658Madison, WI

TECHNICAL SERVICES LAW LIBRARIANc/o Cynthia MayUniversity of Wisconsin Law Library975 Bascom MallMadison, WI 53706-1399

Summary

In 2004, I shortened the OBS surveyin an attempt to attract more OBSmembers to fill out the form. Frompersonal experience, I admit I have notfilled out OBS or TS surveys in prioryears because I didn’t want to take thetime to wade through them. However,even with the shorter survey, I receivedonly 56 responses from 330 OBSmembers for a 17 percent return. Somy plan was unsuccessful. Such a lowreturn rate makes the survey not verymeaningful but useful information wasgathered nonetheless. I therefore wantto thank those who responded all themore.

OBS Programs Profile

At the 2003 AALL meeting in Seattle,41 members who responded to thesurvey attended and 15 did not attend.The most popular program was

2004 OBS Membership Survey Results2004 OBS Membership Survey Results2004 OBS Membership Survey Results2004 OBS Membership Survey Results2004 OBS Membership Survey Results

found very relevant and 11 foundmoderately relevant. “OCLCConnexion” was also well receivedwith almost all attendees finding itrelevant. “Open Linking” and “TwoStepping with Technology” wereattended by half as many members as“Tomorrow’s Catalog” but all thosewho attended found the programrelevant.

Projecting to the 2004 meeting inBoston, 47 of 56 members whoresponded to the survey plan to attendand at least 43 plan to attend all fourprograms which OBS is sponsoring.This is a strong indication that theEducation Committee did an excellentjob of finding programs that meetmembers’ needs.

Many helpful comments werereceived. Some are paraphrased here:

The vision for OBS programs has

been clarified in the last few years.Programs should emphasize thetech in technical services.Very professional; clear arrangementPrograms that help us deal with theAmazon catalog phenomenonwhile maintaining integrity ofrecordsPrograms on cost effective andtime effective ways that law firmscan participate in union catalogs/utilities like RLIN and OCLCMinimize conflict between OBSand TS sponsored programsPrograms on FRBR, AACR2revised chapters 9 & 12, andConnexionAvoid duplicative programs andcovering old technology (such asOPAC functionality/usability)Programs on new developmentsand leading edge trendsRLIN workshopsProgram on the OBS Strategic Planand what has been implementedrecentlyNetworking and discussion groupsfor librarians with similar titles

“Tomorrow’sC a t a l o g ”which 23m e m b e r s

(continued on page 19)

technical services law librarian · technical services law librarian, march, 2004 page 3 solicit...

Documents