Proceedings of the

6th Annual Federal

Depository Library

Conference

April 1 4 - 1 7, 1 997

Library Programs Service

U.S. Government Printing Office

Washington, DC 20401
U.S. Government Printing Office

Michael F. DiMario, Public Printer

Superintendent of Documents

Wayne P. Kelley

Library Programs Service

]ames D. Young, Director

Depository Services Staff

Sheila M. McGarr, Chief
Proceedings of the 6th

Annual Federal Depository

Library Conference

April 14- 17, 1997

Washington National Airport Hilton

Arlington, VA

Library Programs Service U.S. Government Printing Office

Wasliington, DC 20401

1997
Marian W. MacGilvray

Editor

Any use of trade, product, or firm names in tliis publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement

by tlie U.S. Government.
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

Table of Contents

Agenda v To Be or Not To Be a Depository: Answering the Questions and Envisioning a Brighter

Future: Diann Weatherly 1 To Be or Not To Be a Depository: Answering the Questions and Envisioning a Brighter

Future, From the Vantage Point of a Regional Federal Depository Library: Barbara Levergood 5 The Federal Documents Depository #0337, A Success Story: Lessons We Learned: Anna A. Sylvan 10 OCLC Electronic Archiving: John A. Hearty 16 Managing the Depository Database: Some Opportunities With Shared Technology

Part I: GPRD-lnstitutional and Statewide Benefits of an Internet Accessible

Relational Database: Nan Myers 19

Part II: BDLD and GPO: Creating a Database of Fundamental Depository Information

for Web Access by Depository Libraries: Thomas Tyler 28

Permanent Access Planning: Presentation of USDA Digital Documents: Recent

Presentation Activities at the National Agricultural Library: Keith W. Russell 34 USDA Publications: Creating a Preservation Action Plan: Planning Summary:

Gregory W. Lawrence 37

Report on the Meeting USDA Digital Publications: Creating a Preservation Action Plan: Evelyn Frangakis 41 Key Considerations in the Long-Term Retention of Digital Information: Paul F. Uhlir 45

Bureau of the Census Update: John C. Kavaliunas 51 Agency Update: The Small Business Administration: John Ward 55

Patent Products on CD-ROM: David L Morrison 60

Tell Someone Who Cares: Creating Opportunities to Inform the World (Outside of

Libraries) About Government Documents: Robert A. Hinton 62

"Federal Information Center, How May I Help You?" Or, "People Sending People": Warren Snaider 67

NASA Information for Government Depository Users: Dr. Roger D. Launius 70

National Criminal Justice Reference Service: Anne Hudson Bolin 72

Innovation on the Web: Everything Old Is New Again: Saundra Williams 79

Bibliographic Access to Electronic Resources: International Standards: Summary of Remarks: Jean Hirons 84

Bibliographic Access to Electronic Records: National Standards: Thomas A. Downing 86

iii
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

Internet Cataloging at GPO: Wilfred D. Danielson 88

Internet Cataloging at GPO: f/7een Seremeth 90

Internet Cataloging of Serials at GPO: Steven R. Uthoff. 93 Moving From Print to Electronic Dissemination: When to Do it And How: The National Ocean Service Tide Prediction Tables Experience: Richard L. Sillcox 97

The Bureau of Justice Statistics' Rules for Living on the Information Superhighway,

or How Simplicity, Sen/ice, and Attention to Customers Can Help Hustle Tons

of Ripe Digital Bananas: Tom Hester 103 Moving From Print to Electronic Dissemination: Why, When and How: Patent and Trademark Office Experience: Summary of Remarks: Martha Crockett Sneed 1 08

Bibliographic Control in an Electronic FDLP: Problems, Practices, and Policies: Cynthia Wolff 110

Bibliographic Access to Government Information: Carol Bednar 115

Bibliographic Control in an Electronic FDLP: Problems, Practices and Policies: Barbara Selby 118

Bibliographic Control in an Electronic FDLP: Problems, Practices, and Policies: Arlene Weible 121 LC/G&M's Scanning Program: Where We Are and How We Got Here:

Elizabeth Mangan 1 25

Access and Preservation via Digital Surrogate for Spatial Data: Mary Lynette Larsgaard ...^3^ Preservation of Cartographic Materials: A Case Study: David Cobb 137

Designing Web Pages for Depositories: Jennifer E. McMullen 142

Creating Web Pages for Depositories: Rosalind Tedford 147

Building Library-Agency Partnerships: Stuart M. Basefsky 151 A Working Partnership: Gregory Lawrence 1 55

Preservation Is Common Sense: Practical Tips for Government Documents Collections:

Julie Arnott 1 58 Emergency Preparedness and Recovery: Thomas F.R. Clareson 164

Preservation Planning for Permanent Public Access to Paper-Based Collections: Irene Schubert 1 71 Planning for Preservation of Digital Information: an Archival Perspective: Kenneth Thibodeau 176

Permanent Access Through Partnerships: University of Illinois at Chicago, U.S. Government

Printing Office, U. S. Department of State: Duncan Aldrich 1 79

iv
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

Agenda

Spring 1997 Depository Library Council

Meeting sc Federal Depository Conference

April 14- 17, 1997

Washington National Airport Hilton 2399 Jefferson Davis Highway

Arlington, Virginia

Sunday, April 13

Afternoon

4:00-5:00 Orientation to the Depository Library Council and Federal Depository Library Conference

This session is designed to acquaint first time attendees with how Council works and

to preview Conference activities over the next 3 1/2 days.

• Sheila McGarr, Library Programs Service (LPS), GPO, Facilitator 6:00 Informal pre-dinner get-together to network by food preference Monday, April 14

Morning

8:00 Registration and Coffee with Council and GPO Staff 8:30 Welcome & Remarks

• Jan Fryer, Council Chair

• Michael F. DiMario, Public Printer 9:00 Keynote Address

• Eric Peterson, Staff Director, Joint Committee on Printing 9:30 50th Council Meeting Commemoration

9:45 Break

10:15 GPO Update

• Wayne P. Kelley, Superintendent of Documents

• Gil Baldwin, Chief, Library Division, Library Programs Service (LPS)

• Robin Haun-Mohamed, Chief, Depository Administration Branch, LPS

• Sandy Morton-Schwalb, Electronic Transition Specialist, LPS

• Thomas A. Downing, Chief, Cataloging Branch, LPS

• T.C. Evans, Assistant Director, Office of Electronic Information Dissemination

Services (EIDS)

• Joyce T. Parsons, Program Analyst, Documents Technical Support Group

V
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

12:00 Working Lunch

In order to foster networking, librarians are requested to lunch with other librarians from similar types of institutions. Afternoon

2:00-5 : 00 Depository Library Council Committee Reports and Recommendations for Council Action

2:00-5:00 New Documents Librarians Informal session to answer questions from mundane to complex about depository

issues. For new documents librarians or those who feel "new" to any aspect of

depository librarianship. Veteran documents librarians from a variety of backgrounds plus GPO staff will be available.

• Ann Miller, Acting Team Leader, Public Documents and Maps, Duke University,

Facilitator

• Cynthia Wolff, Acting Head, Government Publications and Maps, Northwestern

University 2:00-5:00 GPO Access (Demonstration): All Databases

• Terri Barnes, Management Analyst, EIDS

• Vicki Ries, Management Analyst, EIDS

2:00-3:00 LPS Tour

2:00-3:00 Patent Public Search Room Tour

2:00-3:00 Center for Legislative Archives Tour

2:00-4:00 STAT-USA/Intemet Demonstration

2:00-3:00 Pathway Services (Demonstration)

• Lee Morey, Electronic Transition Staff (ETS), LPS

2:00-3: 15 To Be or Not To Be a Depository: Answering the Questions and Envisioning a Brighter Future

• Diann Weatherly, Documents Reference Librarian, University of Alabama at Birmingham

• Barbara Levergood, Electronic Documents Librarian, University of North

Carolina, Chapel Hill

• Anna Sylvan, GIS/Govemment Documents Librarian, St. Charles City-County

Library District 3:00-4:00 OCLC's Electronic Archiving Initiatives

• John A. Hearty, Director, Reference Services Business Development Division, OCLC

3:30-5:00 Managing the Depository Database: Some Opportunities With Shared Technology

Part I: GPRD-Institutional and Statewide Benefits of an Internet Accessible Relational Database

• Nan Myers, Government Documents Librarian and Cataloger, Wichita State University

Part II: BDLD and GPO: Creating a Database of Fundamental Depository Information

for Web Access by Depository Libraries

• Thomas Tyler, Associate Director for Budget and Technical Planning, University of Denver

vi
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

4:00-5:00

5:30

What is the Carrot? Incentives to be a Partner (Focus Group)

• Duncan Aldrich, ETS, Facihtator Dinner with Council and GPO (Informal groups meet in hotel lobby) Tuesday, April 15

Morning

8:00

8:30

:30

10:00

10:30

12:00

Afternoon

2:00-5:00

2:00-3:15

Coffee with Council & GPO Staff Depository Library Council: Working Session

Self-Study of a Federal Depository Library: Progress Report

• Jan Fryer, Council Chair

• Sheila McGarr, LPS

• Gail Snider, LPS

• Nancy Peluso, Connecticut State Library

• John Phillips, Oklahoma State University Depository Library Council: Working Session 1997 Biennial Survey of Depository Libraries

• Anne Watts, Council Vice-Chair

• Sheila McGarr, LPS

• Diane Gamer, Head, Documents & Non-Book Formats, Harvard University Break

Depository Library Council - Plenary Session Permanent Access Planning: Preservation of USDA Digital Publications

• Keith Russell, Deputy Library Director, National Agricultural Library

• Gregory Lawrence, Government Information Librarian, Cornell University

• Evelyn Frangakis, NAL Preservation Officer, National Agricultural Library

• Paul F. Uhlir, Associate Director, Special Projects, Commission on Physical

Sciences, Mathematics, & Applications, National Research Council Working Lunch

In order to foster networking, librarians are requested to lunch with other librarians from similar sized institutions

Depository Library Council Working Session Committee Reports Other topics TBA

Federal Agency Update Session, Part I Census Bureau

• John Kavaliunas, Assistant Chief, Marketing Services Office, Bureau of the Census STAT-USA

• Ken Rogers, Director, STAT-USA, Economics and Statistics Administration Small Business Administration

• John Ward, Writer/Editor, Office of Advocacy

vii
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

2:00-5:00 GPO Access (Demonstration): All Databases

• Terri Barnes, Management Analyst, EIDS

• Vicki Ries, Management Analyst, EIDS

2:00-3:00 LPS Tour

2:00-3:00 Trademark Public Search Room Tour

2:00-3:00 National Digital Library Demonstration

2:00-3 : 00 Patent Products on CD-ROM (Demonstration)

• David Morrison, Fellowship Librarian, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office 3:00-4:00 Tell Someone Who Cares: Creating Opportunities to Inform the World (Outside of

Libraries) About Government Documents

• Robert Hinton, Reference/Documents Librarian, Indiana University Purdue

University Indianapolis 3:30-5:00 Federal Agency Update Session, Part II Federal Information Center Program

• Warren Snaider, Manager, General Services Administration NASA and Information Dissemination on the Doorstep of the New Millennium

• Dr. Roger Launius, Chief Historian, National Aeronautics and Space

Administration

National Criminal Justice Reference Service

• Anne Bolin, NCJRS Librarian 4:00-5:00 Pathway Services (Demonstration)

• Lee Morey, ETS Wednesday, April 16

Morning

8:00 Coffee with Council & GPO Staff 8:30-12:00 Depository Library Council Working Session

Draft Recommendations and Action Items

8:30-10:00 Regional Program

Innovative Uses of the WWW

• Ann Marie Sanders, Depository Librarian, Library of Michigan

• Thomas Tyler, Associate Director for Budget and Technical Planning, University of Denver

• Saundra Williams, Head, Government Publications, University of Memphis

8:30-9:45 Bibliographic Access to Electronic Resources: National Standards

• Jean Hirons, Acting CONSER Coordinator, Library of Congress

• Thomas Downing, Chief, Cataloging Branch, LPS

• Wilfred Danielson, Cataloger, LPS

• Eileen Seremeth, Cataloger, LPS

• Steven Uthoff, Administrative Librarian, LPS

10:00 Break

viii
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

10:00-12:00 Federal Publishers Committee Moving from Print to Electronic Dissemination: Why, When and How to Do It • Stan Prochaska, Public Affairs Officer, U.S. Department of Agriculture

• Richard L. Sillcox, Oceanographer, National Ocean Service

• Gary Lauffer, Chief, Publications Services Branch, Bureau of the Census

• Tom Hester, Technical Editor, Bureau of Justice Statistics • Martha Sneed, Manager, Patent and Trademark Depository Library Program, U.S.

Patent and Trademark Office

10:00-11:00 LPS Tour

10:00-1 1 :00 Patent Public Search Room Tour

10:00-1 1:00 National Digital Library Demonstration

10:30-12:00 Regional Program

Bibliographic Control in an Electronic FDLP: Problems, Practices, and Policies

• Cynthia Wolff, Acting Head, Government Publications and Maps, Northwestern

University

• Carol Bednar, Government Documents Coordinator, California State University, Fullerton

• Barbara Selby, Government Documents Librarian, University of Virginia

• Arlene Weible, Periodicals and Government Documents Librarian, Willamette

University 10:30-12:00 Digitizing Maps for Preservation

• Elizabeth Mangan, Head, Technical Services Section, Geography & Map

Division, Library of Congress

Alexandria Digital Library: Digitizing Spatial Data for Access and Preservation

• Mary Larsgaard, Assistant Head, Map and Imagery Laboratory, University of

California, Santa Barbara

Digital Preservation of Cartographic Materials: Historical Maps and Current Government Information

• David Cobb, Head, Harvard Map Collection, Harvard University 12:00 Working Lunch

In order to foster networking, librarians are requested to lunch with other librarians from the same geographic region Afternoon

2:00-5:00 Depository Library Council Working Session 2:00-3:00 Designing Web Pages for Depositories

• Jennifer McMullen, Government Publications Associate, College of Wooster

• Rosalind Tedford, Government Documents Assistant, Wake Forest University

ix
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

2:00-3:00 Regional Program

Building Library-Agency Partnerships

• Stuart Basefsky, Information Specialist, Cornell University

• Gregory Lawrence, Government Information Librarian, Cornell University

• James Horsfield, Chief, Research Support and Training Branch, Economic

' ' Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture 2:00-5:00 GPO Access (Demonstration): All Databases

• Terri Barnes, Management Analyst, BIDS

• Vicki Ries, Management Analyst, EIDS

2:00-3:00 _ LPS Tour

2:00-3 :00 Trademark Public Search Room Tour

2:00-3:00 Center for Legislative Archives Tour

2:00-3:00 Pathway Services (Demonstration)

• Lee Morey, ETS

3:00-5:00 Regional Service Strategies: Planning Session

• Daniel Barkley, Government Information Librarian, University of New Mexico

• Ridley Kessler, Government Documents Librarian, University of North Carolina

at Chapel Hill

3: 15-5:00 Preservation Is Common Sense: Practical Tips for Government Document Collections

• Julie Amott, Manager, Preservation Services, SOLINET

• Thomas Clareson, AMIGOS Preservation Service Manager

Thursday, April 17

Morning

8:00 Coffee with Council & GPO Staff 8:30 Preservation Planning for Permanent Public Access

• Irene Schubert, Acting Chief, Preservation Reformatting Division, Library of Congress

• Dr. Kenneth Thibodeau, Director, Center for Electronic Records, National Archives and Records Administration

9:15 Permanent Access Partners

• Colleen Hope, Director, Office of Public Communication, U.S. Department of

State

• John Shuler, Head, Documents Department, University of Illinois at Chicago

• Duncan Aldrich, ETS

10:00 Break

10:30 Depository Library Council - Plenary Session Report of Draft Recommendations and Action Items (including audience response and comments)

12:00 Adjourn

X
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

To Be or Not To Be a Depository: Answering the

Questions and Envisioning a Brighter Future

Diann Weatherly

University of Alabama at Birmingliam

Birmingham, AL

Good afternoon and welcome to this afternoon's program, "To Be or Not to Be a Depository: Answering the Questions and

Envisioning a Brighter Future." My name is Diann Weatherly. I am the Documents

Reference Librarian at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. I will be presenting a non-depository library point of view. Our next speaker will be Anna Sylvan, GIS/Government Documents Librarian from the St. Charles City- County Library District in Missouri. Anna will bring to us a perspective from a public library as well as the smaller library point of view.

Finally, Barbara Levergood, Electronic Documents Librarian from the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, will look at our

topic from the Regional Library perspective.

I'm sure there's not just a few of you who

wonder just exactly what is our topic! In some

ways, this was intentional. What I asked of today's panel, including myself, was to look at the past and current situation of the Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP), to consider and answer some of the questions

that evolved from this environment, and then

to envision a brighter future. What I asked of us was, essentially, to be creative, to imagine what kind of FDLP of the future would solve some of the problems we face in our libraries. Someone asked me if this program would

address dropping depository library status. In a round-about way, the answer is yes. However, what I have asked of this panel is to try to take

a positive view of the future. I truly believe

that unless you can imagine a better situation,

it's very difficult to achieve it. Nevertheless, I am a librarian for a Government documents

collection in a non-depository library, and I hope to provide some insight in that direction. Now that you know who we are, please allow

us to know a bit about you. If you would,

please raise your hand in answer to a few

questions. How many of you are documents

librarians from public libraries? Academic

libraries? What about law libraries or other

special libraries? How many of you work with

the Federal Government, including the GPO,

in some capacity? The next question involves how long you have working in the area of Government documents. How many have worked with documents less than five years? Five to ten years? Eleven to fifteen years?

Fifteen to twenty years? Over twenty years? The last question I have for you is phrased in a manner I don't usually like to use, but please bear with me since I think it is important for us

to know: how many of you do not have the World Wide Web available to the public yet? Of those who raised their hands to that question, how many do have World Wide

Web access available to yourself or your staff? Thank you. I prefer not to ask questions in the

negative, but I think it's important for us as a panel and for you as an audience to maintain our perspective about where the documents community stands as far as technological

progress is concerned.

In order for you to understand my point of view as a non-depository documents librarian, you have to understand a bit about my

situation at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, or UAB. UAB was established as a separate university from the University of Alabama in 1969. The University of Alabama,

1
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

yes, is the university with "the" football team,

"Roll-Tide," etc. It's located in Tuscaloosa, a 45-minute drive from Birmingham (and it happens to be the location of a regional depository library). UAB started from a medical school, for which it is still best known. The enrollment has grown from 5,381

students to over 1 6,000. The total employee

count is over 1 5,000 - Birmingham's largest employer and the fourth largest employer in the state. The reason employee count almost matches our enrollment count is because of the inclusion of the university hospital staff and

all the medical research staff in that total. The

University estimates that UAB has a 1 .6 billion dollar economic impact in the area.

MePv'yn H. Sterne Library is the general library for the campus. There is also a separate medical library at UAB, as you might expect.

In 1969, Sterne Library held 10,000 volumes

and was housed in two classrooms. In 1996, we held over 1 million volumes and 2,500

periodicals, and we have a three-floor building with seating for over a thousand users. The

library online system is NOTIS and includes 1

7

online periodical indexes shared within a state consortium. Why would such an important research

university not have a depository collection? Well, we tried. In 1970, the library director

(our first; we've only had two directors), sought

depository status, but the effort failed. There were already as many depositories in the

district as the law allowed. Even a senatorial

effort failed. Fortunately, as UAB was quickly

coming into existence, so also was a company

called Congressional Information Service (CIS). The library has subscribed to the indexes and

complete microfiche collections of ASI and CIS

since the beginning. The library holds an

estimated 80% depository equivalent documents collection. If you would like to know more about our library and some of the

figures cited below, the details are provided in an article I completed last year: "A U.S. Government Publications Collection in a NonDepository Research Library: A Case Study," in the Journal of Government Information, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 471-489, 1996.

When I first came to work at UAB in 1 985, I held secret hopes to eventually gain depository

status for our library. I talked with other Government documents librarians, attended meetings and workshops, and eventually

signed on to GOVDOC-L. During my elevenplus years, I began to see some advantages of my non-depository situation. With my

(primarily) ASI and CIS microfiche collections, there were no shipping lists, claims lists, superseded lists, or discard lists. Microfiche, compared to paper documents, do not need to be barcoded, labeled, sheiflisted, or security

stripped. I did a five-year comparison (for the

years 1989-93) for my best estimate of an 80%

paper collection. To shelve 1 ,520 feet of paper would have cost our library $7,478.

Instead, for that five-year period, we spent $2,790 for one microfiche cabinet (which, in reality, holds more than a five-year period of microfiche). I talked to several of the larger depository libraries in Alabama about the number of titles they sent to the bindery during

this five-year period. As I estimated the cost

for binding for this same size collection, the

cost could have been anywhere from $6,653

to $31,430 (depending on what a library chose

to keep in paper vs. microfiche or discarding,

etc.). Sterne Library does purchase some

documents in paper copy, but the cost for binding was less than $1,000 (on such titles as Surx'ey of Current Business, some of the Alabama census volumes, etc.).

I studied surveys, the Federal Depository

Library Manual, articles, and GOVDOC-L

messages to come up with a composite staffing scenario for an 80% depository library: 1 librarian, 1 paraprofessional, and about 80

hours of student help. At Sterne Library, the documents staff involves one librarian and 2 hours of student help per week (which, at the time of the article, was 1 9 hours per week). These two hours are still adequate for filing and refiling of ASI and CIS microfiche. The quality of service with a primarily microfiche collection depends a great deal on good indexing and on good equipment. The

reference interview process almost always

involves a follow-through to instruction on 2
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

how to use the microfiche reader/printers. I add here that "browsing" and "serendipity" are not lost, but they are different. My users and I have run across interesting titles through the ASI and CIS indexes, as well as surrounding

fiche titles when pulling a microfiche. The disadvantages of the UAB non-depository

collection involve weaknesses in the areas of popular public information (pamphlets

usually), monographs, patents, technical documents, and maps. Of course, several of these areas are not a part of all depository

collections, either, but you still receive some

publications in each category which are not easy for me to obtain. I see the absence of Government CD-ROMs in our collections as both a disadvantage and an advantage, and I bet most of you know what I'm talking about

right away. I might want some of the census CD-ROMs, but don't care a thing about

supporting all the CD's none of you have

figured out how to use yet! The final disadvantage is that microfiche, even with good indexing and equipment, is still microfiche. You're all wondering about now what this has

to do with you, and definitely what it has to do

with a "brighter future." Well, I think that my

work situation has some parallels to the

electronic environment. To a certain extent, a "brighter future" already has some reality to me as a non-depository documents librarian because of greater access.

Like microfiche, Internet-based electronic documents need no shipping lists, claims lists, superseded lists, or discard lists. Superseded documents are updated dynamically, and there

is no need for someone to list, pack up, and

ship off discarded documents. Like microfiche, electronic documents do not need

to be barcoded, labeled, shelflisted, or security

stripped. There's no need for more shelf space, microfiche cabinets, or binding of documents.

Probably the most important point is that the

collection reaches far beyond our library walls and is more timely. For many of you in the

depository community, you think about what

you're losing. For those outside the "automatic receipt" club, think about what

we're gaining! One of my most frequent

requests for information is from the Federal

Register, both for regulations and for grants announcements. Whereas the information used to come in about a week after publication

date, and on microfiche, now I lead a user to the information, perhaps over the phone, on

the day of publication. Like microfiche, the information is more hidden, but, in my

"brighter future," the indexing is good, whether from the GPO or a private vendor,

like CIS. Also, "browsing" and "serendipity"

are not lost, but, again, are different (and many Web sites include "browsing" capability as a

part of their site). Once computer equipment is in place and staff

is trained, librarian and library staff attitudes

will be more positive in helping users. As with

microfiche, the reference interview involves

instruction with the equipment; the instruction merges with the answer to the question.

I'd like to add here that I believe libraries are going through a computer purchase "hump"

right now and, although everyone talks about

the 18-month longevity of computer

equipment, not a// computers will need to be

replaced or upgraded with every update in technology. Another aspect I envision for a

brighter future is more "coherent" service. In my current NOTIS library system environment,

our OPAC and 1 7 online periodical indexes

are searched very nearly the same (through the wonder of Z39.50 standards). I don't have to teach a user one methodology to search the Reader's Guide and then another to search

PAIS. I have enjoyed a streamlined simplicity

that I think I'm about to lose because of the World Wide Web, but I would hope for some

standardization in my "brighter future," at least for Government Web sites.

I have three final thoughts for you. I would

like to emphasize that documents departments and librarians are not alone. The current changes are library-side changes, not documents changes. Since all libraries and

3
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

departments within libraries are facing electronic information issues, partnering, or at least conversing, with those outside the Government documents department is very

important. Second, and I say this from outside

the depository program, the FDLP is still needed because the librarians are trained for access and are an important advocate for nonprivatization of Government publications. This issue is important for all libraries, indeed,

all citizens. I would think that nonprivatization would even be important for private publishers, in order for them to have

access to Government information to add

value to and resell. Finally, I envision a new

type of depository library: an Internet-only, electronic affiliate. It would receive no paper, no fiche, no CD-ROMs; but the librarians would partner to provide access, the right computer equipment, and new depository

librarians, who would be added to those

trained for access and to the voices of the aforementioned advocates.

4
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

To Be or Not To Be a Depository: Answering the

Questions and Envisioning a Brighter Future

From the Vantage Point of a Regional Federal

Depository Library

Barbara Levergood

University of Nortli Carolina, Cliapel Hill Chapel Hill, NC

I. Introduction We are here today to talk about why we are Federal depository libraries and what we see as

interesting possibilities in our futures as depositories. I will do so from the vantage

point of a Regional in the Federal Depository

Library Program, one that serves the University

of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, a large research institution, and that also serves the

selective libraries in and the people of North

Carolina.

II. Why We Want to Remain a Depository

We have been a depository since 1884 and a Regional since 1 962. We want to remain a Regional library in the program. To this end, we have worked hard to keep our

administrators informed about the transition to a more electronic program and about arguments in favor of us retaining our status and arguments for the retention of the program

itself. This is what we tell them.

First, we are strong advocates of effective public service in support of the public's right to access Federal information. Federal depository libraries being critical links in the

ability of citizens to access that information, we must also be a depository. Second, we want to retain our status because

our tangible collection is needed in support of the mission of the university; it is large, heavily

used, and the property of the Federal Government. We would lose the right to house it if we gave up depository status. The argument that we always hear is that now

that so much Federal information is available

to anyone via the Internet, why do we need

the program? Why do we need librarians? Indeed, why do we need libraries? And we are now familiar with the counter arguments involving public service. Librarians

in the program specialize in Federal information and thus will be able to provide

better public service for that information, than

librarians who lack the specialist's knowledge,

by and large. The services provided by my

colleague at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, I am sure, are an exception.

Fourth, librarians in a depository library are

best equipped for recognizing, acquiring, and

providing public services for fugitive documents. Our final argument for being a Federal depository library is one that I'd like to discuss

in some detail. Depository libraries have

received limited depository access to some

Internet services that are otherwise for-fee, for instance, STAT-USA, CenStats, and in its infancy, even GPO Access. It is critical that other such services fall under the depository umbrella since they constitute one clear

5
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

advantage that depositories have over

non-depositories in the world of the Internet.

It is also critical that depositories be granted more than one single-user password to such

services, or better, that such restrictions are eliminated altogether. In our own situation, we have purchased a campus site license for STAT-USA in order to provide wider access. How many more such purchases for access to Government information otherwise available on a very limited basis through the program

can we make before our administration decides that depository status provides no real advantage for access to Internet sen/ices? That

is, some administrators are beginning to ask what the advantage is in being a depository if we end up paying for wider access anyway in the end. The same argument can be made for CD-ROM

or tape purchases that we have made because

the depository product was for some reason unusable or inefficient in our library setting. For instance, we have purchased spatial data from Wessex in ArcView format to supplement

the TIGER/Line files; census data from Wessex

to supplement the census discs; not to mention

bibliographic data from Marcive to supplement

our beloved MoCat.

License agreements are another example of a

restriction on public access that has already come back to haunt us. Some products such

as the NTDB now cannot be networked

without further cost to a depository. Many

products come with access software that is licensed; libraries may not redistribute the software along with the data without paying a fee to the software vendor. Of course, this is but a small part of the cost

shifting that is taking place during this transition to a more electronic program.

Depositories have always made significant contributions of resources to remain in the program. However, Government information

that is accessible without restriction and that is usable is good for the program and the public

is the ultimate beneficiary. Make this the first item on my wish list.

III. Depository Services in the Future

I would like to talk about what the depository system might look like in the future in the area

of services. I'll begin with levels of service to the public, and then turn to Regional services

for selectives.

Levels of Service to the Public Advances in technology, increasingly

sophisticated user capabilities, rising user

expectations, and the migration of massive amounts of important Government information

to electronic format are providing new

opportunities and a mounting imperative to provide effective public service. These

opportunities are of two types. On the one

hand, we must now be prepared to provide new services that are at the same level of

service that we have been providing in the

past. For example, in addition to providing

photocopying capability, we now also provide

downloading and printing. These services are

typically very basic ones that we would hope

that every library could provide. GPO and the depository community are working on public service guidelines for the program. The guidelines can provide a uniform minimum level of service that a user can expect in a depository library that cannot

be guaranteed outside of the program. This could be very good for the program, if only to provide a way for us to define our public

service role as we enter an era in which we

must address how we can provide effective public access to information that we may not even own. On the other hand, we also have the opportunity to provide new services at higher

levels of service than we have in the past. For example, we used to be able to provide a volume of the census to a user to pick a number out of a table. To access the same

data in electronic format, we must have a more

sophisticated understanding of census geography and the way that the census was

conducted. Users may need to be shown how

to create their own tables. They need advice

6
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

on what format they should save their data in for import into their favorite application. Furthermore, we are constantly asked

questions that only a statistician can answer.

In today's world, many libraries cannot

provide an answer to these more complex

questions without referral.

I'd like to see the Regional libraries, especially those in large research institutions, move

towards a future in which statistical questions can be asked and answered in the library or on campus by a range of well-integrated library

staff and affiliated staff, from technical

assistants to librarians to statisticians. I am not

talking about a simple referral to another unit on campus, but rather about a group of staff with expertise in different areas working with a user to make sure the information needs are met. A similar scenario might be appropriate

for the TIGER/Line files and for Congressional

materials. Note that data librarians and CIS

librarians may already be offering these higher

levels of service. Other products and services might benefit from higher levels of different services. Why is it important to move towards higher

levels of service for electronic information, whatever those services might be? First, the census example illustrates that it is not just the format of the information that is changing.

Rather, the point is that the way in which the information is accessed and used is changing

dramatically in the migration to electronic format. Naive users are effectively denied

access to much information if all we can

provide is the lowest level of service: assistance in getting in and printing out or downloading. To provide effective access, higher levels of service for some information is now essential. The second reason that offering higher levels of service is critical is that we are arguing for the need for the program on the basis of the

expertise that we can provide. We are

justifiably proud if we can provide even the

basic level of service for a large percentage of the depository products and services. However, an individual user will not be

impressed by this breadth of expertise because

it is usually invisible to him/her. Furthermore,

as the computer literacy of the users themselves increases, they do not need help

getting in and downloading. Rather, we are finding that users are looking to librarians for more and more depth of expertise, i.e., higher

levels of service. For example, we have users who were weaned on CD-ROM products such

as the census or REIS, found out about and

used the wonderful data extraction sites on the

Internet, and now come back to use the CD-ROM products instead when they want to ask questions of library staff, taking advantage

of the higher level of service that a human can

offer. The more difficult challenge, of course,

is to offer services, especially higher levels of

service, to remote users.

Finally, many Regionals have products sitting

in our CD-ROM cabinets that go unused

in-house because we cannot support them at the level of service that the product demands.

Furthermore, many potential users of the CD-ROMs are effectively denied access because the unsupported CD-ROMs do not

circulate; because the user is ineligible to borrow from the library; or because the user

lacks the equipment, software, or expertise needed to use the product at home. Increasing

the level of service for the important Federal products and services would be one way to broaden access to them. We have already seen that the electronic

services that we could provide are often far greater in number and far more sophisticated than those we needed to provide for print or microfiche. We all know the problems. We

are limited by staff, staff expertise, money,

time, space, equipment, policy, and

institutional commitment. It is already a constant challenge to properly evaluate what

services we will provide and at what level of

service.

But, Diann says that we are allowed to dream

today without worrying about the consequent

problems. So my dream is that we will have

guidelines that specify a minimum level of service for depository products and services. 7
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

Then we will begin to discuss what the public

service role of the depository might be at higher levels of service.

Regional Services for the Selectives Turning now to Regional services for the

selectives, let me say up front that, in my view,

it is important that the concept of the Regional be retained, even though the details may not

yet be known^about the exact role of the Regional. It is now and will remain important

in the future to have a geographically

dispersed group of libraries that can be relied on to have a more comprehensive tangible

collection and more experience and expertise with Government information in all formats. It is no less important to have a Regional

librarian who is a strong leader for the depository community in the region.

Libraries are still working out our own

problems in the transition to electronic information and we are now beginning to discuss unmet needs and whether and how the Regionals can help to sen/e those needs. The services provided by a Regional to the

selectives in the region might be categorized

into levels of service in much the same way

that a library's public sen/ices are. I'd like to focus on a couple of the many types of higher

levels of service that a Regional might offer to the selectives.

It would be a mistake to assume that the Regionals would not have much of a role with

respect to information on the Internet. Rather, we expect that Regionals will play a leadership

role in helping to provide wider access to

for-fee Government sen/ices such as STAT-USA, CenStats, World News

Connection, or private services such as Legi-Slate or Washington Alert. The issues include who would pay for the wider access: the Regional, the Regional in cooperation with

the selectives, or even the program; and how

wide the access could be. Regionals might also assist selectives by

providing copies of unlicensed CD-ROMs or

by providing files from them. This is something that we have planned for in our

library. We have an FTP site that can be used

for storage of large amounts of data. We also have an as-yet-undebugged CD-R, a CD-ROM

recordable device that will allow us to make

copies of CD-ROMs or of large files from CD-ROMs or the Internet. These copies can be loaned to selectives or to users. There will be limits on what the Regional can

do, however. A couple of simple examples

make the point. On the collections side, as more and more Federal Government

information leaves the program, Regionals

hope to purchase the information or access to

it. But the Regional will have to make

selection decisions for these materials and thus we will not have everything. On the services

side, it is our understanding that although

Regionals should have all tangible materials in our collections, under program guidelines we

need not be responsible for supporting every

electronic product or service. Rather, we are asked to have policies on levels of service that we will provide for given products and

services.

Planning for the Future

It was Diann's idea for this panel that we

envision what we might achieve as depository

libraries in the future, unencumbered by

naysayers. I am not a visionary. But I do try to keep my finger on the pulse of time marching

forward for planning purposes. Attending the meetings of the Depository Library Council is one of the very best ways to do that. Another way, for our library, is to watch the Census Bureau. There are many reasons for

this. The Bureau is planning right now for Census 2000. The census is the single most

heavily used material in our section. The

problems in providing access to the census in

all of its formats are diverse and challenging

enough that we feel that if we can support the Census Bureau's products, we have the

capability to support almost any Government

information product. Based on what the Census Bureau has told us so far, we expect far

8
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

fewer print products for Census 2000, with more information available on CD-ROM or the

Internet. Maps may migrate almost completely

to digital format. Thus, we are looking at having the equipment and software in place

for the arrival of the Census 2000 products, including that needed to print out census maps. The effort that we have already made to provide a high level of support for the 1990

census and to support the TIGER/Line files will pay off for the next one, and the equipment

that we need for Census 2000 will be used for other Government information products as well. The very process of trying to plan for the Census 2000 is great practice for thinking into the future of the Federal Depository Library Program.

9
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference The Federal Documents Depository #0337,

A Success Story: Lessons We Learned

Anna A. Sylvan

St. Charles City-County Library District O' Fallon, MO

Good afternoon. Thank you for inviting me

again this year. Among the many questions that depository

libraries are facing today, the issue of connectivity is one of the most important and

still waiting to be resolved. Connectivity

simply means access. In the age of electronic document delivery, and with the growing number of documents available via the

Internet, it is inconceivable for a depository to function without the connection.

I touched on that issue last year, and those of you who attended the conference and my

presentation might remember the alarming

statistics. According to a study done by ALA of 9,000 public libraries, only one in five had

Internet access. With the increased number of community networks, however (according to the National Civic Review, spring 1996 issue, there are currently over 300 community

networks operating nationally) the odds for the public library to be connected improved

significantly.

This is a follow-up to my last year's presentation and an assessment of our

depository performance, lessons we have

learned, and conclusions that may be helpful

to other depositories. Another Depository? Are We Needed?

The St. Charles City-County Librar/ District, the Middendorf-Kredell Library Branch, is one

of four depositories serving the 9th U.S. Congressional District (CD). The closest 9th CD depository, the Westminster College

Library, in Fulton, Missouri, is 85 miles west of

us. Our Regional is 100 miles away. On day

to day operations, when a document is needed

and is not found in our collection, we rely heavily on our two neighbors serving the 1 st CD: the University of Missouri-St. Louis, 25

miles away, and the St. Louis Public Library, about 45 miles from us. Who Are We?

The #0337 Federal depository was established

in 1990. We are a small depository collecting below 20%. The staff consists only of myself and my assistant, a part-time (20 hrs/wk) para- professional whose duties are limited to the

technical part of the operation. The library has eight branches, all of which

have a minimum of 1 2 public access PCs. By

definition, we are a large library with over 600,000 volumes and still growing.

Who Are Our Clients? Although officially designated for the 9th CD

with a population of over 350,000 residents, in actuality, our depository serves the entire St. Charles County, which is divided between the 2nd CD and the 9th CD. As of 1994, the county population was estimated to be over 240,000. (The Bureau of the Census estimate

puts the St. Charles County population by 2005 in the neighborhood of over 309,000.) The total number of residents that come to us seeking Federal information is estimated to be

over 500,000.

10
1 997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

St. Charles County - Demographics

St. Charles County is a dynamic community

growing at the rate of over 1 8% per year. This

is a community of young, educated

professionals with two-income families. Here is a snapshot of the demographics:

32% are under 20 36% are between 20-39 96.6% are white

87.2%> are married with children 38% with income of $35,000-$74,999 Median family income: $48,040

Labor force - women: 44.7%

Over 50% with college education The library is one of the original sponsors of the community information system: WIN, or the Westplex Information Network. In early January 1995, LYNX, the textual browser, was

used in the basic development stage of the network. In April 1995, Netscape was

installed in most of the branches. As of now,

all branches provide access to the World Wide

Web.

Among other benefits, WIN offers free access

to the Internet to all county residents, and for a nominal fee of $6.00 per month, a SLIP connection. At the present time there are approximately 1 1,000 passwords issued by WIN. Most of them are SLIP accounts. Consequently, our clients are computer

literate, hungry for information, and eager and

willing to learn. The number of requests for Federal information is very high. My unofficial survey revealed that one out of every 1

0

reference questions was document related. Out of these, approximately 65% were

answered with the help of the online sources. Even those rough statistics confirm what is happening in the world at large. The changes

in document delivery are overwhelming and encompassing all aspects of society.

For the first time in history, the local library is no longer the only place where information

can be found. A library has to compete for

clients with other information providers. To

survive, libraries have to justify their existence. They have to prove that the money spent on them is money spent wisely. Libraries have to become proactive in their activities... they have to promote and market their services and

materials.

This is a new environment for all of us. Although our mission remains the same, our

role has changed. We still collect and

disseminate information. We provide answers

to questions. Now, we must teach, educate

ourselves, market and promote, network with

others, provide the access and teach how to use the access. We must proactively seek

potential clients. We must justify our

existence by making sure that our services are viewed as indispensable. As documents

librarians we have to actively engage in promoting and marketing our services.

I never thought that as a Government

documents librarian I would have to learn the

skills of a successful businessman. I realized, however, that this is exactly who I am: a businesswoman who seeks partners, develops

networks, makes sure her services are always

dependable, develops a clientele who relies on her information, gets referrals from people

who have established a solid business

relationship with her.

I publish home pages, I select the sources, I teach classes for the general public and for other librarians, promote new products,

collaborate with various institutions, organizations, colleges or other depositories, and local agencies. I cannot sit and wait for the patrons to come to me. I have to seek my

audience! The proactive behavior is particularly important in the case of Federal documents.

Historically, the documents have been

misunderstood and underused and in need of marketing and promoting.

I consider myself very fortunate to work for a visionary director who sought the Internet

11
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

connection before building home pages became fashionable. He was not afraid to take

risks. He is supportive of his staff and

encourages initiative and creativity. In my

activities as Government documents librarian, he gives me a complete "carte blanche." Here in a nutshell is what we do in our

depository: Access to Documents

Cataloging/Shelving

Equipment

Providing access - Home Pages

Bibliographic Instructions and training: staff and the public) Cooperation with the Regional and other

depositories Networking within the community

Promotion/Marketing

Cataloging The project to catalog the entire document

collection should be completed by the end of 1997. At the present time we are simultaneously cataloging retrospective and

current documents. Many of you who

responded to my question on GOVDOC-L (to catalog or not to catalog) indicated that the use

of documents will increase visibly once they

are available on the library catalog. I can

already see the difference in items that are cataloged. The collection is shelved separately from other

reference materials. However, both the reference and circulating documents are shelved together. Most of our items circulate. The non-circulating, reference materials (laws, regulations, current statistical sources) are marked with a symbol "R" on the spine. Prominent signage is used throughout the

library to direct patrons to the documents.

Signage for the document shelves display the SuDocs numbers, the names of agencies, and names of bureaus or offices operating within an agency.

Selective titles of frequently used serials are shelved on prominently situated shelves visible from many areas of the library. Equipment

How much is enough? The guidelines for minimum technical requirements are changing

constantly and what is appropriate today may

be outdated tomorrow. Driven by the information technology industry and the World Wide Web's ever changing environment, the

technical requirements set by the GPO are only reflections of what is happening "out

there." The laptop that was ordered just a year ago for me, specifically for GIS applications, is already

outdated. Fortunately, I was able to request a new one with an active matrix screen with 48

Kb of RAM. How long will it last? I also have

a color printer designated for GIS services and

I already worry that the memory may not be enough.

As I mentioned, all of the branches provide

access to the World Wide Web. Printing commands from the LAN stations are routed to several laser printers situated near the reference desk. The depository CD-ROM products are available on a PC equipped with two 12-slot towers. Printing from this station is done

independently from other LANs, to a single

laser printer. The ten "most popular" CDs are installed permanently; other slots are used for "swapping." The list of the CD-ROM

collection is available both at the station, and

at reference desks of all branches. (The

information includes the title, brief annotation,

information about specific software, etc.). Access

In order to facilitate access to electronically disseminated documents, I currently publish two home pages: GIS and Government

Documents:

12
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

http://www.win.org/library/matls/govdocs/ main. htm

http://www.win.org/services/gis/gishp.htm

Although I provide links to comprehensive

sites, most of my links lead directly to full text documents or searchable documents. In order

to do so, I cut most of the intermediary links and place a site directly on top of my home

page. This has proven to be very useful in the public library environment where the level of search capabilities is very uneven and it is not uncommon to encounter patrons labeled as "mouse-impaired!" My documents home page

is directed toward the general public to access Government information either from the

library's PC or, even more importantly, from a remote place.

Statistics show that my home pages are used

heavily both in the library by the reference

staff and patrons that come in, and by remote

users.

I am solely responsible for the contents, presentation and technical aspects (I also upload the pages onto the server which gives me control over timeliness of the information and streamlining of the entire operation).

Just recently I have created a documents home

page designed specifically for children. I hope

this document is balanced, properly offering

solid information and a little bit of fun!

http://www.win.org/iibrary/matls/govdocs/

kids. htm

Bibliographic Instruction/Training

Electronic access doesn't necessarily mean that the information we are seeking is readily available. This is a common misconception among many. I remember many times my

frustration while searching GPO Access. Like many others it is a powerful, comprehensive

site, but remains difficult to navigate not only

for the neophyte but also the expert. The Documents Department at the St. Charles City-County Library District is participating in a

very aggressive year-round program of bibliographic instruction for the general public. Realizing how difficult it is to master the

Internet, the district has decided to offer regular search classes, on different levels, for people from our county. Twice a month, with a limited seating of 12,

lasting an hour and a half, a hands-on class. How To Access Government Documents, has been so successful that a new format is under

consideration.

Similar training, although on a smaller scale and in an informal manner, is offered to the

library staff at regular internals. Thanks to Friends of the Library, who donated

over $1 5,000 to the district, we were able to buy several high quality LCD panels that were

urgently needed for Bl/training programs

offered by the district. Cooperation with the Regional and Other

Libraries Changes are inevitable. Changes are

unsettling. Changes, however, can be viewed

as opportunities for growth, for re-evaluation,

for trying new approaches.

During those times of uncertainties, communication and cooperation with other

institutions are vital.

Instead of "reinventing the wheel" each time we encounter a new situation, we should be

able to plug into existing resources. This is the mechanism that works so well for all of us via GOVDOC-L.

Similarly, the Regional library should be the

"safety net" for those with minimal or no

Internet connection.

I would like to see the Regional: As a clearinghouse for depositories that do

not have Internet access, or very limited access (i.e., text-based browser only)

13
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

As a think tank, coordinator and initiator of

training for documents librarians (i.e., training on GPO Access and other databases where proficiency is needed)

University of Missouri at Columbia are my

major partners in document delivery. Success ... How Was It Possible? Continue to be a support and resource

center for other depositories. Networking Within the Community

This goes to the heart of the issue of marketing,

promoting and proactive activities of the depository.

I attend numerous meetings of local Chambers

of Commerce, education groups, business groups, and others. I want them to know not only who I am, but what I can do for them as a Government documents librarian. I use

specific examples using documents that were

helpful in similar circumstances. Promoting/Marketing

I try to stay visible! News from the documents department that

affects the district, the reference departments,

the users, is transmitted by me via:

• Reftalk, our internal distribution list

• Visionary leadership of your parent

institution. The depository does not

function in a vacuum. We are an integral part of a bigger organization and our performance reflects its activities.

• Seeking partnership with other

organizations (i.e., community networks):

Identify funding

Identify the partners

Identify common organizational goals Recognize the various organization

cultures Be aware of what is happening in your

region and your state

• Leadership that embraces and seeks technology (technology is viewed as an

opportunity and challenge, not a

hindrance).

• Financial commitment to technology. Your institution has to provide financial support for programs that require technical improvement.

• Local newspapers

• Handouts (published by our PR people)

• Signage within our library

• The Internet

• Word of mouth

I will use any form and opportunity to talk about the documents, our collection, the access we provide, and the training that we

offer.

I maintain a close relationship with local colleges. The University of Missouri-St. Louis and the Social Sciences Department of the

• Community involvement is essential. Free access to the Internet creates a culture that allows people to experience new ways of document delivery. New possibilities go

hand in hand with hunger for information and eagerness to learn.

• Community needs have to be identified and addressed on a daily basis. The

collection and access to documents that the depository provides is only valuable when it is used in addressing the needs.

• Match the needs by offering services and

creating opportunities for learning.

• Promote the depository activities within your institution and your community.

14
7997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

If you are interested in information on community networks, I have created an HTML

document that you can access directly:

http://www.win.org/library/matls/govdocs/ cnet.htm

or, from my home page:

http://www.win.0rg/librarymatls//g0vd0cs/ main. htm/Depository #033 //information on Community Networks

I would like to thank my colleague from the St. Charles City-County Library District, Jim Brown, for sharing with me his thoughts on

developing a community network. He was

involved in developing WIN from its conception.

15
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository' Conference OCLC Electronic Archiving

John A. Hearty

OCLC

Columbus, OH

OCLC Electroni^Archiving

• Goals of Electronic Archiving (EA)

• Obstacles to Implementation of EA

• Dimensions of Ideal EA System

• OCLC Strategies and Strengths

• Electronic Archiving Pilot

• EA System Functionality

• Pilot Business Model

• Content Providers Goals of Electronic Archiving

• Offering broad access to information

• Preservation

• Reduce storage cost Obstacles to Implementation of Electronic Archiving

• Libraries reluctant to give up physical copy

• Property rights in electronic media are ill defined

• Initial scanning required for creation of electronic archives Dimensions of Ideal Electronic Archiving

System

• Security

• Access

• Economy

• Openness

• Library needs

• Publisher needs

• Information user needs

Dimensions of Ideal Electronic Archiving

System: Security

• Destruction due to natural hazard

• Physical deterioration of the storage medium

• Technological obsolescence

• Business failure Dimensions of Ideal Electronic Archiving

System: Access

• Standards for header information to support creation of index files • Cost-effective search and retrieval capabilities

• Provision for sustaining accessibility

• Contract protection for access arrangements Dimensions of Ideal Electronic Archiving

System: Economy

• Archiving cost must be lower than existing cost

• Opening up shelf space/reduction in capital expense

• Less expensive access

• No longer dual subscription

• Cost recovery Dimensions of Ideal Electronic Archiving

System: Openness

• Facilitates greater access

• Ease of adaptation as better technologies appear

• Linking with other systems, both archival and online

16
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

Dimensions of Ideal Electronic Archiving System: Library Needs

• Guaranteed permanent availability

• Low and predictable costs

• Leverage existing library investments Dimensions of Ideal Electronic Archiving System: Publisher Needs

• Provision for compliance with intellectual property rights

• Credible protection against unauthorized

use

• Subscription/usage fee models which

reduce publisher risks Dimensions of Ideal Electronic Archiving

System: Information User Needs

• Unprecedented power for searching and

browsing archival contents

• Unprecedented power for making the contents available worldwide, around the

clock, matter of minutes OCLC Strategies

• Leverage OCLC online system

• Leverage existing OCLC services

• Leverage scanning activities • Leverage OCLC membership and

cooperative tradition

• Focus on what is practicable in the near term

• Maintain flexibility for future OCLC Strengths Membership & Mission OCLC is uniquely positioned to participate in a cooperative endeavor to address the archive problem.

• Such a role is appropriate to OCLC's

charter and mission.

• OCLC's library membership constitutes a powerful basis for cooperative approaches.

• OCLC has the requisite capabilities.

OCLC Strengths Storage Technology

• OCLC's robotic tape silos will allow for very cost effective storage of large amounts

of data.

• Disk can be used in conjunction with tape

to offer rapid access to frequently used

material.

• OCLC will guarantee ongoing migration to current technologies

OCLC Strengths Access

• Using FirstSearch as the front end, OCLC

can offer intuitive access using nonproprietary technology.

• FirstSearch users offer a large, ready outlet

for archived collections.

• OCLC has the systems in place to charge

for access (and thereby offer cost recovery).

• OCLC is staying current with access technology. OCLC Strengths Scanning, Indexing, Cataloging

• For libraries that need to digitize collections, OCLC can offer both scanning and indexing through Preservation Resources and our New Albany operation.

• Tech Pro, Prism, PromptCat, RetroConn

Electronic Archiving Pilot Project

• Selected collections mounted

• Partners include 1 1 content providers

representing thirteen collections

• Functionality from FirstSearch/FS ECO

• Scheduled implementation: Fall 1997

Goals of the Pilot Project

• Test the technology with a variety of

formats.

• Gain input from "real" users, and study usage issues.

• Demonstrate a working prototype by fall • Validate the concept and costs in preparation for commercial release.

17
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

Electronic Archiving System Functionality

• Comprehensive search capability

• Automatic classification of each document by Dewey, LCSH, and other

• Browsing by topic areas, collection name, physical media & journal/issue

• Displays of citation, abstract and

header, and full text (image, PDF,

ASCII)

• Hyperlinks to GPO home page, similar documents, etc.

• Comprehensive statistics, reports, and

billing if desired

• 7 day by 24 hour availability

Pilot Project Business Model

• OCLC assumes costs of loading,

storing, and offering access to the data

• Content providers sign a non-exclusive

license allowing OCLC to use their data through 1997 without compensation

• Statistics on usage of their material are shared with content providers Content Providers

• Irish American Advocate

• Grand Rapids Public Library

• New York Public Library

• Follett and University of Illinois • Northwestern University

• University of Chicago

• Council on Preservation and Access (Knox College and The Museum of the Confederacy)

• Library of Congress

• GPO

18
1997 Federal Depositoiy Conference - Proceedings

Managing the Depository Database:

Some Opportunities Witii Shared Technology

Part I: GPRD-Institutional and Statewide Benefits of an

Internet Accessible Relational Database

Nan Myers

Wichita State University

Wicliita, KS

Good afternoon. Today I am sharing a session

titled "Managing the Federal Depository

Database: Some Opportunities With Shared Technology." My co-presenter is Tom Tyler, of the University of Denver. I am Nan Myers, Government Documents Librarian and

Cataloger, at Wichita State University in Wichita, Kansas.

Parti: GPRD - Institutional and Statewide Benefits

of an Internet-Accessible Relational Database My portion of the presentation, "GPRD - Institutional and Statewide Benefits of an

Internet-Accessible Relational Database," showcases a relational database called "jeopardy," which we are developing at Wichita State as a tool for processing Federal documents. The acronym GPRD stands for Government Documents Processing Relational Database. The logo is a modified GPO eagle.

For the past eighteen months, I have worked

with a colleague at Wichita State, John

Williams, who is Acquisitions Manager, on the development of GPRD. During that time, GPRD has evolved from flat files, or a simple

data warehouse, into a complete relational database. Now, GPRD is an information management system with data mining

programs, which provide a platform for report generation and a decision-support system. In

addition, GPRD will be both LAN and Internet accessible.

In Part II of this presentation, Tom Tyler will discuss his BDLD (Basic Depository Library Documents) Web site and its relationship to depository libraries and the GPO. The common theme of the two parts of our

presentation is "shared technology" and the formation of institutional relationships.

I think we can agree that "sharing" is one of our best survival tactics in the documents

environment today. The electronic transition

in Government publishing has impacted us all significantly. It has produced substantial change without a well-planned infrastructure. For several years our needs for state-of-the-art technology for processing and control of documents have been running ahead of standardized product development. Since most depository libraries appear to be

searching for similar solutions, and duplicative

efforts waste time and money, shared technology can be a salvation.

In fact, the documents community has a strong

track record for sharing, especially with regard

to reference access and bibliographic tools. Now, the rapid development of electronic versions of Federal Depository Library Program

publications, such as the List of Classes, has encouraged depository site development of net-based processing utilities (such as GPRD)

19
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

and adaptation of electronic documents for re- publication on the World Wide Web, through value-added Web sites such as BDLD. In addition, the GPO is making strides with its partnership program development concept.

For example, the Shipping List Site, which

assists us with shipping list processing and

label production, is at a Web site supported by

UT/Arlington and SU NY/Buffalo. To set the stage for GPRD, I will provide an overview of Government documents at Wichita State University (WSU), which has been a United States Federal Government

documents depository since 1903. Wichita

State is a metropolitan university, situated in the largest city in Kansas, and it has a student body of 14,000. WSU's Ablah Library is a moderately large research library and selects about 60% of the Government Printing Office

output. I have listed total holdings on the slide for your information. The library has also been

a full Patent and Trademark Depository since 1991.

In 1994, the Wichita State University Library embarked on a plan to increase access to the Government Documents Collection. Elements

of the plan:

1 ) Load over 200,000 records for post-1 976

imprints into LUIS, the library's on-line public access catalog, and provide for ongoing maintenance (june 1994);

2) Eliminate duplicative services between

departments by mainstreaming Government documents into the automated materials flow of Technical

Services (April 1995);

3) Eliminate labor-intensive tasks by

developing in-house technology (fall 1995

to present); and

4) Develop a two-librarian model for documents, which would allow for excellence in both public access and

technical services management of the

collection, (began November 1996)

My program today focuses on item number

three: "Eliminate labor-intensive tasks by

developing in-house technology." When we

moved documents processing to Technical

Services, we realized that our Library Management System, NOTIS, did not provide

a sufficient platform to manage all the record- keeping tasks mandated by the Superintendent

of Documents, as we made this transition from

a paper-based system to an electronic management system.

At that time, we initially identified three needs:

First, we needed to warehouse map

holdings. The map collection had never been shelflisted and was not profiled for records. For ten years, maps had been

listed on ledger sheets at receipt. Prior to

that, map records were non-existent. Second, we wanted to track unresolved

claims and rainchecks electronically, but

outside of the NOTIS LSER system for periodicals. Most of our documents

periodicals are checked in and barcoded

through LSER; but we do not use the LSER

claim module, due to the unpredictability

of receipt for documents. And third, we hoped to provide easy

storage and retrieval of item file information.

Therefore, GPRD was initially developed to archive Government documents processing

information, with a check-in module for maps. The information was warehoused into a series of flat file databases in Paradox 7.0 for Windows 95 application. However, we quickly perceived the potential of Paradox, not only to manage cumbersome

tasks which had previously been handled

manually, but also to provide Technical

Ser\/ices and Government Documents with a complete relational database. GPRD now

provides a platform for report generation and a decision-support system for collection development. Let me explain how the

20
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

evolution, which is ongoing, has taken place

to date. Overview

GPRD initially consisted of information in tables, or files, most of which were imported from legacy systems-our own NOTIS database and others. Development continued such that information in these tables (essentially a data warehouse), could be associated using a query

generator (Paradox's Query by Example), to achieve a discovery-driven data mining system. The terms "discovery-driven" and "data mining" are buzz words in the relational database field, but I think they are very

descriptive. "Data mining" is the process of extracting valid and comprehensible

information from large databases and using it to make crucial business decisions. The term

"discovery driven" refers to the quest for unknown information or patterns which can be

used for day-to-day tactical decisions, as well

as for long-term strategic planning and

forecasting. I have provided a list of suggested

introductory reading on this topic among my

handouts. The platform for GPRD is Borland/Corel's Paradox 7 for Windows 95. Our library's administration has provided its employees with

technical support for the Borland/Corel Office

Professional 7 Suite, which includes 32 bit versions of Paradox, WordPerfect, Quattro Pro, Netscape Navigator, Presentation and GroupWise. All applications are Windows

95/NT compatible, and all software is Internet- enabled. Two computer languages have been

used for the programming of GPRD: Paradox

Application Language to create the forms (or views) from the tables, and Borland's C+ + Compiler for Windows 95 for the data mining

features. In the future, the database will be mounted on a Novell NetWare 4.1 LAN. Hardware requirements for the database are at least a 486/66 PC with a large hard drive and

1 6 megs of RAM. Costs for hardware and

software should be under $2,000 with academic discounts.

Functionality The database itself consists of nine tables which are very simply designed. As you view

the tables, you will notice that the primary key

for the database, the common denominator of

all the tables, is the Item Number and SuDocs Number pair. A compound key was selected

as an unique identifier.

I'm going to summarize the components of each table, but only toggle over into the first one in GPRD, due to time constraints. The

forms which I will show you later in my

presentation contain the information in the

tables and are more interesting. The main item table contains:

1. Main Item Table: Item Number/SuDocs

Number

Title and Agency

Active and/or Selected

2. Format Table: Item Number/SuDocs

Number

Format Type: P, MF, E Format has its own table, because format

constitutes a many to one relationship. That is, many formats can be attributed to one item number/SuDocs stem pair.

3. Library Table: Item Number/SuDocs

Number

Library ID

(This table provides a State of Kansas Union Listing for Current Items selected. You will notice that the proper names of the libraries are displayed, rather than their depository numbers or their NUC symbols, which is the data available in files from the GPO and BDLD, respectively. We wrote a program to convert this information to allow quick recognition by the user.)

This is our largest table, containing 62,000

item records, because individual item

records are in the database for each

institution which selects that record. In 21
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

other words, an item record could have as many as 18 duplicates in GPRD.

4. Maps Table: Item Number/SuDocs

Number

Map Number and Date

State/Region

City/Area Inspected Copies The Map Table is our only use of this database for bibliographic check-in. GPRD could be adapted for this purpose, however.

5. Rain/Claim Table: Item Number/SuDocs

Number

Shipping List Number : SuDocs Extension/Piece

Title Claim or Raincheck

Record Date

Result

6. Use Table: Item Number/SuDocs Number

MonthA'ear of Use

Total of Use for MonthA'ear

7. Subject Table: Item Number/SuDocs

Number

LC Subject Headings

8. Note Field Table: Item Number/SuDocs

Number

Notes from the Discontinued List

This table is new. It was added to accomodate the field for notes, which

appears in the Discontinued List, but not in the List of Classes.

9. Library Key Table: Depository numbers

from the State of Kansas with their proper names.

Original Implementation

In developing GPRD, we consciously

incorporated as much extant information as possible. In addition to our original "three needs"- for maps, claims, and item file-we included the State of Kansas Union Listing for current items, LC subject headings for our

current items, our GPO and Marcive profiles, and external use data. Check-out data for documents at Ablah Library is unautomated

and has only been maintained since 1990.

This was the first time we have been able to assess this data. The initial work, done in the fall of 1995, pre- dated the ASCII text files available online today from the Government Printing Office.

• At that time, we acquired an Item File from

Margaret Mooney at UC/Riverside on

diskettes for around $100.

• Then, we imported the State of Kansas Union Listing distributed to us on diskettes by the Documents Librarian at Washburn

Law Library.

• Our Marcive profile was another diskette import,

• but our GPO profile was "pre-ltem Lister" and was originally keyed in by a student.

• Other data keyed in included: un-automated check-out data for the use file, information in the map file

• Finally, to obtain an initial sample of about 400 LC subject headings from our Government document bibliographic

records, a programmer from our computing

center ran extract programs written in COBOL from our NOTIS system.

Utilization of the Data We then worked to identify and utilize information hidden in these tables. The goal was to organize the information in ways that 22
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

enable decision making. Requirements for this phase of the development included:

1 ) Integrating the captured data into task- specific VIEWS or FORMS (rather than

tables) for Online Transaction Processing.

2) Extracting or mining the information contained in the integrated data using

queries for Online Analysis Processing.

3) To achieve this, software had to be written. The design of the database was

accomplished in the spring of 1996 to our

specifications by a team of four graduate

students directed by Professor Sunderraman of our Computer Science

faculty. At Wichita State, we have been

fortunate to build cooperative relationships between departments. It is another example of sharing for survival.

Task-Specific Forms GPRD currently has six task-specific forms or views: the LIBRARY FORM, the FORMAT

FORM, the MAP FORM, the RAINCLAIM FORM, the SUBJECT FORM, and the USE FORM.

I'm now going to toggle over to the database and show you the forms.

1. We call the enhanced Item File the LIBRARY FORM. The LIBRARY FORM

includes and can access:

2. The FORMAT FORM shows:

1) Item Number

2) SuDocs Stem

3) Format selected by our Depository

3. The MAPS FORM provides:

1) Item Number

2) SuDocs Number

3) Map Number

4) State

5) City and Region

6) Date of Map

7) Whether we have inspected the map

8) Number of copies

9) Information Space: There is information for Technical Services use on the lower portion of the screen, showing the agency name, all titles connected to this Item and SuDocs

stem, whether the item is active and

whether it is selected.

4. The RAINCLAIM FORM provides a date- linked log of all pieces missing from

shipping lists and claimed or rainchecked.

Fields include:

1) Item Number

2) SuDocs Stem

3) Shipping List Number

4) Extension of the SuDocs Number

5) Action Date

6) Whether it is a Raincheck or a Claim

7) Title

1) Item Number

2) SuDocs Stem

3) Publishing Agency

4) Title

5) Whether the title is active in the List of Classes

6) Whether WSU selects that title 7) Format Information

8) LC subject headings for that title 9) The Kansas Union Listing for the title 10) Usage count for the title by month and

year

1 1) Claims and rainchecks notations

The SUBJECT FORM includes:

1) Item Number

2) SuDocs Stem

3) Title 4) Subject(s) for that title The USE FORM shows:

1) Item Number

2) SuDocs Stem

3) Agency

4) Title

5) Date of the Use (month and year) 23
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

(All days default to the first of the month)

6) Number of Uses

Building On the Work of Others

I have already discussed the initial building blocks of our data warehouse. These were a good beginning; but in the past six months, we

have replaced the data in these tables via Tom

Tyler's BDL[>,'which is a value-added Web

site, or network-often called a VAN. BOLD as a VAN for GPRD

Last fall, I phoned Tom Tyler to compliment him on his very useful and attractive Web site, the BDLD. I was interested in his Union

Listing for the State of Colorado, which Tom

had extracted from a tape of depository library profiles he purchased from the GPO.

Once again, the time frame last fall was "pre- Item Lister," and depository profiles were not

yet available from a GPO Web site. In addition, Washburn Law Library had abandoned updating the Kansas Union List, and I was seeking an alternative to manual

keying of data. Subsequent discussions yielded a mutual agreement that GPRD could

import data from the BDLD. We chose to derive data from the BDLD rather than from

the flat files available from the GPO because

the BDLD provides uniform data. Tyler has been committed to developing and

maintaining Government document computer

files, as well as scrubbing that data, for over 1

5

years.

Features Imported from the BDLD to Date:

Implementation of Those Features at WSU:

• The BDLD to GPRD Data Migration

(please refer to the Four Step Data Mining

handouts):

1 ) The BDLD Web site (data as we view

it) 2) BDLD HTML Source Code (data available for data mining)

3) Bar Delimited ASCII File Sample (data mined from BDLD after conversion by

C+ + extract program written at WSU)

4) Sample Report Output (Data after import into GPRD)

• We decided to merge the List of Classes with the List of Discontinued Items in order to create the largest possible number

of entries of post-1 976 imprints for our

Cataloging Staff. An additional field was

created in GPRD to accept notations on

titles available in the Discontinued List.

• The programmed refresh of the GPRD

database tables required program(s)

written in Borland C+ + for Windows 95

for creation of bar ( | ) delimited text files. There are three of these files: main item

file, format file and library file. These files are extracted from the BDLD Web site, imported into Paradox, and in the process, converted into Paradox tables. We are using a temporary directory for all imports and deriving the information over to the main directory after checking it. The BDLD arrays the List of Classes and

the Discontinued List. We re-array the data to suit our database design, in particular 1) the format table and 2) default values on current and discontinued items. For GPRD, the format constitutes a many

to one relationship, as I stated earlier in discussing creation of the original tables. That information has to be isolated into its own table. With regard to defaults, in the

List of Classes, we created the default value

"Yes" in the active field. In the Discontinued List, the default value is "No"

in the active field. The defaults are the

1 ) WSU's List of Item Selections (our profile)

2) Kansas Union List (18 other Kansas

depository profiles)

3) List of Classes / . 4) List of Discontinued Items

24
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

distinguishing feature once the two lists are merged. In other words, when you look at the list of titles, you can distinguish between active and inactive.

In order to accomplish this programming,

John and I once again depended on

departmental cooperation at WSU. All of the C + + programming has been done by

Professor Xumin Nie of the Computer

Science Department. He has made his Web site available for the Data Miner for GPRD. The address is: http://riker.cs.twsu.edu:1081/"nie/GPRD/ main.html.

• Once the above tables are created, two

queries are run to create an intelligible Kansas Union List of Depository Holdings.

This process is detailed in a handout titled "Data Mining with GPRD," which I have

with me and would be glad to share with anyone interested after the program.

• All of the text files are converted into tables

in a temporary directory. When we have

verified the accuracy of the files, they are derived over to the permanent project

directory. Report Generation An extremely useful aspect of GPRD is report generation. As I have stated, GPRD provides a platform that allows all the diverse data in its tables to be quickly extracted and associated. The staff can initiate standard, pre-programmed

reports, or they can produce ad hoc reports using Query By Example (QBE). There are three types of reports we plan to generate regularly:

1 . Map Reports: Reports can be created for our topographic map holdings by state or by SuDocs stem. These reports can be

exported to QuattroPro and laser printed

for use at the map cases.

2. Claims and Raincheck Reports: Information on shipping list claims and

rainchecks is warehoused for periodic

retrieval and review. At intervals, we print a report to forward to the Documents

Information Librarian, so she can review

missing titles. An action box to the right of each title allows her to request: 1) acquiring the title through Interlibrary Loan, 2) purchasing the title, or 3) disregarding the title.

3. Collection Management Reports: Because

of the space limitations in the Government

documents area of Ablah Library, this type

of reporting may play a crucial role in collection management decisions. At Wichita State, documents now occupy

867o of their allocated space. We have been told that we should not expect

additional space for 15 years; therefore, we

must look seriously at zero physical growth. GPRD can provide:

A) Subject Analysis Reports: Several

subject analysis reports can be used for decision support.

1 . A simple subject analysis of selected/active items can indicate whether those items support the curriculum.

2. The addition of subject headings to use report, will correlate subject

distributions for high, low, and no use

titles.

3. Agency distributions can be

aggregated within subjects and use.

B) Usage Reports: GPRD contains

external use data from January 1990

through December 1996. Titles which

have circulated can be reported in SuDocs number order or in ascending

or descending order by use tools. Use

data can also be queried by format.

C) Kansas Depository Library Reports: Knowledge of the collections of other 25
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

Kansas depositories is helpful for interlibrary loan support. We can also make demographic analyses of the

distribution of titles through our state. A title in our collection with no

demonstrated use, which is available in 14 other depositories in the state might be a good candidate for weeding or deselection. In addition, the ability to associate data on statewide holdings could underwrite cooperative

collection development in Kansas at a time when many of our colleagues are feeling the stresses of space, costs,

staffing and accountability. Conclusion

In summary, GPRD allows us to:

1) Reduce labor-intensive tasks in a period of reduced staffing.

2) Permits us to accomplish inspection requirements.

3) Frees us to address issues of public access

in an electronic era.

4) Allows for pro-active rather than re-active decision making.

5) And, can facilitate cooperative statewide depository goal-setting.

In conclusion, I should mention that GPRD is an ongoing research project. In the near

future, we plan to:

1) Link GPRD to the Internet, so that other depository libraries in Kansas can access it from a Library home page.

2) Network GPRD to the LAN so that all library employees can get to it. 3) Develop a project to study internal use of documents. On the one hand, GPRD is a very specific product, tailored to the needs of one

university. On the other hand, it represents a multitude of generic needs, and the concepts

used in GPRD's development can be

duplicated anywhere.

The development of GPRD represents a proactive stance during a period of uncertainty and change in the history of Federal documents. I believe that as Wichita State and

other depository libraries in the same position share their resources with the GPO, a synergy

will be achieved. Eventually, the GPO will provide a standardized set of tools for working

on documents in the 21st century. However,

the need for ingenuity in the field will not

disappear. And with that thought, I will turn the program over to Tom Tyler.

Define terminology:

First, for those who are not familiar with the concept of a relational database, let me define some of the terms I will be using. A database

is an organized collection of information or

data. If you have an online address book, you

have data organized about people into specific categories or tables, such as names, addresses and phone numbers. Now, if you also have a birthday book that contains birthdays of your family and friends, and maybe some information about their clothing sizes and favorite colors, you have a second database. With two databases and two

tables, you have the beginning of a database

system. Some database systems look at only one table

at a time. These are called flat file systems. If you use this kind of system, the terms table and database mean the same thing. Using the example of the address book and the birthday book, you would be able to look at one at a

time, or see the names and addresses in one book and the names and birthdays in another

book. You would not be able to combine

selected information from both tables. However, with a relational database, such as Paradox, you can extract specific information from each table and assemble it in a meaningful way. Using the address and

birthday books example again, if you wanted 26
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

to see a list that includes a friend's name,

address and birthday, in a relational database, you could link the address and birthday tables by identifying a common field ("Name"). Then, you would be able to combine the kinds

of information you want to see from both

tables. Paradox keeps the tables in a database

separate, but understands there is a

relationship between them, in a relational database like Paradox, the term database means all your tables and all their relationships. Paradox requires the use of a primary index (or primary key) used in each of the tables to provide the common link. When you begin to use a relational database, you probably will not know all of the potential relationships among the tables. But, eventually, you will discover them. You will probably have to dig for them, which is referred to as data mining. Data mining is the process of extracting valid, comprehensible and previously unknown information from

large databases and using it to make crucial business decisions. Other terms related to this

analogy to mining are: discovery based data

mining, which refers to seeking unknown but

valid information or patterns; data exploration,

digging through large amount of historical detailed data;and drill-down technology, which suggests searching deeply into the

information. Another much-used term is data warehouse, which is simply a place to store data. The

implication in warehousing is that you are managing the database in some way, probably

for some kind of decision-support. A data warehousing system provides a complete endto-end solution for delivering information to

users. You will be able to process the stored

data, transforming it into business information. You can obtain the data from your internal systems, from external information providers, and most recently, from Web servers. The

resulting information you acquire can be

instrumental in making tactical decisions about

day-to-day business operations and also for strategic decision-making involving longer- term planning and forecasting.

27
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference Managing the Depository Database: Some

Opportunities With Shared Technology

Part II: BDLD and GPO: Creating a Database of

Fundamental Depository Information for Web Access by

Depository Libraries

Thomas Tyler

University of Denver Library Denver, CO

Just in Time is a Japanese production and

distribution model copied by many U.S. and

international manufacturers. It operates on the assumption that, as a producer, you have what

you have to have when you need it. Large

inventories and the facilities to house and manage them are not needed. Resources are used wisely. The benefit, we are told, is greater efficiency and lower costs in production. Savings can be passed on to the customer through lower prices. In the marketplace, such a producer gains a "competitive edge" and hopefully, greater market share. What would just in Time mean for the Federal Depository Library Program?

• Separates would never stack up on a shelf or work table awaiting shipping lists

• Electronic representation of Class/Item Number and minimal bibliographic information would be immediately

available to:

1 . Create abbreviated records for the OPAC with item level information such

as bar code number, location, and

class number;

2. Create appropriate labels with SuDocs

Number, shelving location, property and depository stamp information;

3. Maintain statistics for receipt and

processing; and

4. Generate "pull slips" for material being

superseded or for class corrections.

• Many of the activities associated with

dealing with corrections in cataloging and

classification would be significantly diminished.

• Typing/data entry errors for Item Numbers

and Class stems would be a thing of the

past.

• Reports could be generated to simplify the

correction of records in the local OPAC or depository database.

• Local information for new depository

items could be captured and added to your

depository's profile for subsequent sharing with depository partners or vendors.

• Recording rainchecked and claimed

materials could be significantly simplified.

28
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

While there are certainly more benefits than those enumerated here, I'm sure that most of us would be at least moderately satisfied if it were possible to achieve the above in a reasonable amount of time.

Actually, we are very close to this nirvana state right now. In the past year LPS has made

several of the basic data tools needed for Just

in Time-type processing available to libraries in electronic format. The Internet and the World Wide Web give us the means to acquire this data. To go further there are a few additional data files that either need to be modified or added to those that are currently available. Current Depository Library Data

There is an abundance of electronic data

available to depository libraries to help in the

daily processing of depository documents, but

there are some obstacles to the effective use of

this data. One or two of the basic tools we

need to move to "just in time" are not available

at the time we need them or in a form that lends itself to immediate use.

File Availability on the World Wide

Web/Internet When I look at what data is available for use by individual depository libraries on the InternetAVorld Wide Web, I see the following:

• Files or Web pages created for viewing

with a Web browser. Each of the 1 200 +

pages/files served from my Web site - Basic Depository Library Documents (BDLD)

[URL:

http://www.du.edu/'ttyler/bd ldhome.htm] - are in this category. As such they are

useful for database creation by only the

patient and knowledgeable few. When, as

is often the case, the files are alternatively available in another format, the data may

be acquired for local database creation.

In some cases, as with the GPO Access Monthly Catalog (which is now actually something more and something less that the print or CD-ROM version of the same

title) there is only an online version

available for viewing. Because records in the database are retrievable one at a time and because there is no downloadable file containing the same data, use of this valuable resource by most depository

libraries for catalog record production is not possible.

• Files created for downloading. The List of

Classes, Profiles, and Depository Shipping

Lists are in this category. The List of Classes is available in CSV (comma

separated variables) format, which is very

versatile and permits data to be easily imported into spreadsheets, flat file managers and relational databases. The dBase format used for Profiles (the directory of depository libraries) and

Depository Shipping Lists, is perhaps less forgiving than CSV, but is nevertheless an

effective way to allow for data interchange.

• Neither/Nor files. Some files we

encounter seem to be meant neither for viewing nor downloading. The FDLP

Administration Publications versions of the Superseded List and List of Classes which

are served as Web pages fall in this category. Until November 1996, the Administrative Notes - Technical Supplement lists for corrections, changes and additions to the List of Classes fell in this category. Now this publication fits nicely in category one: files for viewing,

but unfortunately there is no good

alternative for downloading.

What is needed is uniformity, standardization and a wider appreciation of the potential use

of depository-related data files. The comma

delimited format is perhaps the most versatile because there are no parameters beyond number of fields per record that have to be

considered in the downloading process. dBase

formatted records are probably the next most

useful format, but only if there is standardization and consistency in the number

of fields, their names, lengths, and properties.

29
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

GPO - Rebuilding the Depository Information

Infrastructure Item Lister:

This valuable Web page was introduced by

GPO/LPS in December 1996. It permits

depository libraries to download their current

list of item selections. Changes made to the

original offering and formally released in February now permit libraries to select output modes that are appropriate to immediate

needs, whether for viewing or for downloading.

List of Classes: 44 use 1904, (Classified list of Government

publications for selection by depositories) is the statutory basis for the List of Classes: The Superintendent of Documents shall currently issue a classified list of Government publications in suitable form, containing annotations of contents and

listed by item identification numbers to

facilitate the selection of only those

publications needed by depository

libraries. The List of Classes is a very changeable

database. My experience is that annually, between 1 0 and 20 per cent of the records are changed in some way each year. With the release of the April electronic

version, GPO has completed one year of

regular, timely publication of this important

tool in a usable electronic format. LPS staff efforts to clean up the List of Classes

are certainly appreciated. As much of the

useful data in this database is hidden or embedded within the free-form "title" area

(e.g., frequency, format, report series designation, notes, etc.), it would be helpful if LPS would separate these data elements out so they can be used in an automated setting.

Closer correlation of List of Classes data with

other resources of the depository program

might also be considered. Some examples:

• Title equivalency when appropriate

with cataloged titles; • Separate data elements for OCLC and

other standard numbers; and

• Provision for URLs (Uniform Resource

Locators). While the law requires that the List of Classes

indicate currently "active" items that may be

selected by depositories, it would be helpful if the database included inactive items also. This information is generally required for some

aspects of local record processing and is necessary for database control at the local

level. For many depositories, keeping track of additions and changes to the List of Classes database is considered next to impossible because so many print and electronic sources have to be consulted. A single authoritative source would certainly be welcome. The "unauthorized" BDLD List of Classes - Additions & Changes attempts to monitor the more common resources where change

information is to be found. While I have not been able to include Shipping List notice of changes as frequently as I would like, what I've noticed is indeed interesting. No single source can be relied on to reflect all changes.

Administrative Notes - Technical Supplement: The most important sections of Administrative Notes - Technical Supplement for local database control are:

1. Classification/Cataloging Update

2. Update to the List of Classes: Miscellaneous;

3. Update to the List of Classes: New Item Numbers; and

4. Update to the Superseded List. While these files have been available in electronic form for several years, they require

significant massaging to make them usable in a database environment. 30
7997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

A CSV (comma separated variables) format would be appropriate (and useful) for these

files.

Inactive List:

This important publication needs to be

available to depositories. Currently the BDLD

version is the only net-available Inactive List that I know of. Local depository processing database applications need this data to work

with older cataloging records and with recently deactivated item numbers that continue to be

distributed or cataloged due to backlogs or format reproduction.

Superseded List:

This file is available in several formats and the

text version can be readily converted to database use.

Electronic Shipping Lists:

Electronic versions of Depository Shipping

Lists are now available from three Web sites in as many formats.

• GPO Access serves shipping lists in dBase

format from the Federal Bulletin Board.

• BDLD provides HTML format shipping lists suitable for printing and useful for in-house

processing.

• The University of Texas-Arlington serves Shipping Lists in an a-la-carte (or user

selectable) format.

• Commercial vendors (e.g., Marcive and

Bernan) also provide this data via FTP or

diskette. While the commercial shipping list products at best reproduce only the errors on the paper

versions, the new electronic Shipping Lists probably contain many more errors that are beyond the usual transposed numbers or mistakes in transcription.

Unlike the paper counterpart, electronic shipping lists illustrate the following rule: More

errors can be made by fewer people in less time. Many of these errors seem to be related

to the production environment.

• Date information that should appear as 6

digits in the format "yymmdd" sometimes

appears in the currency format expressed

to two decimal points;

• Titles are sometimes truncated due to

faulty column width settings in the production software, and

• Item number data, which should be

formatted as text, is formatted as numeric and thus leading zeros are stripped off. Other difficulties in using the electronic shipping list data in a database environment

are related to administrative decisions about which data fields are included and how they have been specified:

• Uppercase/truncated title data appears for microfiche shipping lists, and

• At least initially, during the experimental

stage, the lack of shipping list date.

Like the paper lists, the electronic versions would benefit from standardization of entry:

• Information for serials should emphasize in a standard way the enumeration and

chronology of the material described.

• Information for monographs, whether in series or not, should emphasize the unique

title. Most of us who work with depository

material recognize that AE 2.110:104-188

indicates slip law 1 88 of the 1 04th

Congress. The title "Public Law No. 104- 188" would not be all that helpful if loaded into an online catalog.

31
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

Monthly Catalog: No substitute can be found for the cards in library records; and the problem of actual use of the books in the libraries will never be solved until cards are supplied in sufficient numbers to provide for the proper entries in the various library catalogues fully covering every publication

issued to them. - William L. Post, Superintendent of Documents (Annual Report of the Public Printer for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30 1907, Washington,

GPO, 1907, p. 340)

In the same report, the Superintendent of Documents quotes Richard R. Bowker, editor

of the Library Journal:

[re: analytic card sets for documents] I don't think there could be a greater saving

to the libraries than a system of that sort. Depository libraries should be able to acquire and use GPO's current cataloging production

in their local OPACs.

44 use 1711, (Distribution and Sale of Public Documents) requires the Superintendent of Documents to "prepare a catalog of Government publications" and to print the catalog in pamphlet form. Shouldn't the database from which the current Monthly

Catalog (indeed in pamphlet form) is printed be available to depository libraries in machine

readable form? . As we have been reminded in recent GOVDOC-L communications, the Monthly

Catalog database is an orphan. Created by

GPO, it is sold by Library of Congress, OCLC,

Marcive, Autographies and others, yet it is not maintained as a database by any single agency.

In fact, even with a super abundance of sellers and suppliers, it is probably impossible to acquire from one source, in electronic form, all the records that correspond to their equivalent

in the printed Monthly Catalog.

The depository library community needs a

single, authorized, maintained database. Depository libraries should have free, timely, and efficient access to the records in this database.

For many years libraries that have used GPOMARC records in their online catalogs have had to work around problems caused by the

printing requirements for the Monthly Catalog:

for example, the repetitive cataloging of semiannual serials and the annual reissue of unchanged records for "periodicals." Now

that the printed Monthly Catalog has been

reduced to an unimportant shadow of its former self, shouldn't these disruptive and

costly practices be eliminated? The database should represent record creation and maintenance, not the printed Monthly

Catalog. Ready access to this database by

depositories is one of the major obstacles to permitting libraries to move towards a "more

electronic" processing environment. With current technology, current GPO

cataloging in USMARC format could be made

available to depositories on a daily or weekly

basis via FTP. Implementing Database Controls in LPS The most irritating classification and item number corrections encountered by depository

libraries are those that are merely

typographical errors made during the shipping

list creation process. Not only do these mistakes require hundreds of man/woman

hours to correct in libraries across the country, they play havoc with automated systems. Were LPS to create (or at least verify) shipping

lists in a database environment, such errors could easily be eliminated at the source. Implementation of such as scheme by LPS

might also provide for:

• Controlled processing for adding or

creating new Item/Class categories;

32
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

• Automatic updating of announcement

tools for additions, deletions and changes

(e.g.; Administrative Notes - Technical Supplement); and

• Simultaneous updates to electronic files that make up the List of Classes, the

Inactive List, Superseded List, and the Item

List. Role of the Depository Library Community

It is in the depository library community where

the challenge (and potential) is greatest. Can we find the interest and skills among our

collective personnel and resources to develop

sharable tools to deal with the data that is (and can be made) readily available? We will need libraries to collect and distribute the "value added" elements of relational database technology: macros, query design, specialized functions or programmed

subroutines, table design, API's for different

library systems, etc. We will need a new vocabulary for defining and describing our data and activities. Conclusion

In the past year the depository library community has experienced significant and

increased access to basic bibliographic and

control data resources that have the potential

to greatly simplify local depository processing

activities. With the exception of the Monthly

Catalog, there are database tools in place that now permit depositories to extend processing

to creation of records for local online catalogs (OPACS). GPO/LPS efforts are to be commended. If the few remaining gaps in available data and/or formats are addressed in the coming year, just in Time will be a

possibility for all depository libraries. URL:

http://www.du.edu/" ttyler/dlc97. htm

(for abstract & graphics)

33
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference Permanent Access Planning: Preservation of

USDA Digital Documents

Recent Preservation Activities at the National

Agricultural Library

Keith W, Russell

National Agricultural Library

Beltsville, MD

The purpose of this session entitled "Permanent Access Planning: Preservation of USDA Digital Documents" is to describe what we think is a unique, proactive, and

collaborative approach to preserving and

ensuring access to digital publications from one of the largest Federal agencies, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). The

approach we will tell you about has strong support from USDA administrators. The four speakers on this panel will cover the

topic in this fashion:

• I will provide some background on the National Agricultural Library (NAL) and

its recent preservation activities;

• Greg Lawrence from Cornell will outline the steps that led up to a major

2-day conference held last month to focus on the major elements and

requirements of a digital publications preservation plan for USDA;

• Evelyn Frangakis from NAL will talk about what actually happened at that conference; and

• Paul Uhlir, a consultant with major

responsibilities at the conference and

since, will discuss the results of the conference.

Let me begin with a brief overview of the National Agricultural Library. NAL is one of four national libraries-the others are the

Library of Congress, the National Library of Medicine, and the National Library of Education. NAL is part of USDA's Agricultural Research Service and serves as the departmental library for USDA and as a

national library. USDA was charged with the

role of "acquiring and preserving all information concerning agriculture" when

Abraham Lincoln established USDA in 1862, and NAL has that primary responsibility. NAL is located in Beltsville, Maryland, just outside Washington, DC. The library occupies

a 14-story building, and has a collection of 2.2

million volumes, a staff of more than 200

Federal employees and contractors, and a budget of approximately $20 million per year. The collection is international, and covers the

literature on all aspects of agriculture and

related sciences and social sciences. The

information and database services of NAL are available to anyone. The mission of NAL, in brief, is to ensure and enhance access to agricultural information for a better quality of life. The importance of "Preservation" is mentioned in NAL's full mission statement, in its values statement, and

in its vision statement. "Preservation" is also a

part of one of NAL's three strategic planning

key result areas, and one of the library's eleven

general goals is devoted to preservation. Key

34
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

result area number 2 is titled "Collection Enhancement and Preservation," and the

definition reads: The goals under this key result area address how the NAL staff will ensure that agricultural information essential to the Nation is identified, acquired and

preserved at the local, national and

international levels. An important part of that definition is the last part-NAL does not do everything itself, but

instead collaborates with the land-grant community and other organizations to make

sure that agricultural information is preserved.

Despite the emphasis on preservation in all the key documents mentioned above, NAL has not had significant resources to devote to preservation activities. NAL budget initiatives to improve preservation efforts in the 1980's were never successful. Even without

additional funding, however, NAL was

involved in several preservation-related

activities beginning in the late 1980's.

1 . In 1 989, NAL did a preservation self-study that was facilitated by the Association of Research Libraries/Office of Management

Sen/ices. The resulting publication is entitled A Preservation Plan for the National Agricultural Library.

2. Based in part on that report, a special preconference on the preservation of

agricultural literature in the U.S. was held

at the 1991 conference of the U.S.

Agricultural Information Network

(USAIN)-an association of individuals and

organizations interested in agricultural information. One of the topics explored at the preconference was the development of a national plan for preserving agricultural

literature.

3. Following that preconference, USAIN

asked Nancy Gwinn of the Smithsonian

Institution Libraries to work with a task force to develop such a plan. In 1993, that plan was issued as A National Preservation

Program for Agricultural Literature. That

plan outlined preseni'ation responsibilities

for specific subsets of agricultural literature and proposed which institutions should have which responsibility. NAL used the

report as the basis for a request for Congressional funding that would enable

the Library to meet its responsibilities in a

national preservation program.

4. In FY 1996, Congress approved funds for NAL to build a stronger, better focused

internal preservation program and to assume its leadership role in coordinating

national preservation efforts. In the short time since funding was received, several

activities have been initiated at NAL.

These activities parallel the recommendations from the USAIN report and include the following:

• In January of this year, Evelyn

Frangakis joined NAL as our first full- time Preservation Officer.

• A comprehensive analysis and

evaluation of NAL's microfilm holdings

is being conducted to ensure long-term

preservation and access to these

materials.

• NAL has moved into the digital presenilation arena by digitizing approximately 15,000 pages of Federal

agricultural documents.

• A plan was implemented to upgrade NAL's Special Collections program to preserve and improve access to NAL's

rare and unique materials. NAL and its library partners have well

established procedures for collecting, managing and preserving the hardcopy print

literature. As the agencies of USDA move to electronic dissemination of their serials and

reports, NAL has developed new procedures to handle electronic formats, and has become the

lead organization within USDA for addressing

the broader issues faced by agencies that issue electronic publications. One of those issues is 35
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

how to ensure access to those electronic publications for future generations. That broad issue-how to preserve and provide

perpetual access to USDA publications in electronic format-will now be addressed by

the other speakers.

36
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

USDA Publications: Creating a Preservation

Action Plan: Planning Summary

Gregory W. Lawrence

Cornell University

Ithaca, NY

Introduction As you all know, the U.S. Government collects an enormous amount of public information and is in turn a huge publisher. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) economic

agencies, the Economic Research Service, the National Agricultural Statistics Service, and the World Agricultural Outlook Board, are no

exception to this phenomenon. Where they

are different is how early each of these agencies adopted digital technology in order to disseminate their information. In the mid1980's, these agencies disseminated time

sensitive commodity reports via the Martin

Marietta CIDS system, and a decade later, they

are working with the Albert R. Mann Library at Cornell to disseminate this information on the

Internet. Their partnership with Mann Library has created the USDA Economics and Statistics System, a network accessible, research-level core collection in agricultural economics. The

collection now includes 79 full text serials, over 200 historic data series, and grows by some 400 Mb per year. When this partnership began three years ago, USDA digital publications duplicated print documents. Issues concerning the authority and preservation of the digital files were

minimized by the broad availability of the

print copy. Unfortunately, the economic

agencies are slowly phasing out print publications. For instance, ERS (Economic

Research Service) has converted the Situation and Outlook commodities series to a digital only format. Or, the agencies are creating new

publications which do not have a print counterpart, such as the NASS (National

Agricultural Statistics Service) Crops County

Data annual. As the USDA Economics and

Statistics System grows it is gradually becoming a unique, definitive collection of

digital USDA information. The Problem

Maintaining this collection for future data users presents serious management problems.

First, we are confronted with the need for data

migration. Obsolescence of the original data format is a barrier to the long term use of the

data. Data-sets and reports are prepared with a wide variety of formats, including plain ASCII, formatted text such as PDF, spreadsheet files and binary files used by proprietary software.

It is unclear how, and by whom, these

publications with different file structures will be converted to new file formats as computing

standards change. Clearly, a non-Federal

organization such as Mann Library should not modify USDA publications without official oversight, since this runs the risk of violating the authority of the document. The second problem is the need to move the data to an appropriate storage medium. We

perform a routine backup of the USDA system, but the procedure saves only a copy of the information as organized in a hierarchical file system. To retire aged data in an appropriate manner requires a full range of processes, such

as file collation and verification, and the use of archiving and compression software.

Ultimately, the data must be copied to the proper medium such as magnetic tape

cartridge or CD-ROM.

37
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

Unfortunately, the data management

procedures and the storage medium for these documents have not been specified, either by

the three agencies, or the Department. This

inhibits the library from taking proactive steps

to preserve this information, since without

offical guidance the effort may be wasted if it doesn't ultimately conform to a Departmental

standard.

If the problem were local to the USDA

Economics and Statistics System there might

not be much alarm. But we have been

contacted several times to verify if we will preserve the data we hold, and it has became

clear the problem is generating considerable concern. In the meantime, agency home

pages are filling up with digital publications, and other academic/USDA partnerships,

similar to the one at Mann Library, are developing large data collections elsewhere on

the Internet. The result is a rapidly expanding

body of digital information which potentially is at risk because there isn't a general policy to coordinate the safe and systematic transfer of

digital documents to a final repository.

This issue was raised at the USAIN (United

States Agricultural Information Network)

Preservation Steering Committee meeting held

last June at the Library of Congress. Committee members felt this topic was

important enough to recommend a national meeting to discuss extending the national preservation plan for agriculture to include USDA digital information. The National

Agricultural Library was the first organization

to commit strong financial support for this meeting, and was later followed by the Economic Research Service, the Government

Printing Office, and the Farm Foundation. The Stakeholders Any coordinated preservation effort will have a

large number of interest groups, or stakeholders, who need representation. Stakeholders for USDA information sort themselves into three groups:

1 . Those directly involved or affected by the

preservation of USDA information or those who coordinate or support similar activities

in other Federal agencies.

2. The dedicated information user involved in business, education or policy development.

3. The less demanding, yet very important

user found in the general public. We felt a planning committee for the conference would represent primary members

of these three groups, and broader

representation could be established by

selectively inviting the other 60 attendees.

Putting together a planning committee to represent the broad interests of agriculture is at best a series of trade-offs. It must be large enough to represent and deliberate, but also to make decisions. It must have members with

sufficient expertise to advise and contribute to problem solving. And it must have members

who can perform a variety of roles during the planning stage and at the conference. In the end we constituted a planning committee with

the following members:

• USDA NAL - Pamela Andre, who is the

Director at NAL. NAL is one of four

national libraries, and serves as the library for the Department of Agriculture.

• USDA ERS - Jim Horsfield, an administrator

for the Economic Research Service who

helped establish the USDA site at Mann

Library.

• USDA CIO - Bob Whiting, sitting in for Anne Thomson Reed, the newly appointed

Chief Information Officer.

• GPO - Duncan Aldrich, a depository

librarian, with a one-year appointment to the Electronic Transition Staff at GPO.

• USAIN - Antoinnette Powell, Director of the Agricultural library at the University of Kentucky, and President of USAIN, the 38
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

United States Agricultural Information Network, an organization which represents the agricultural information interests of land grant universities and colleges, agribusinesses, and private organizations.

• Mann Library - Sam Demas, Head of Collection Development and Preservation. Sam has coordinated several cooperative

preservation programs, including one which will have 16 participating

institutions.

• Farm Foundation - Steve Halbrook,

Assistant Director. The Farm Foundation is an unconventional organization with an

interest in the social and economic

implications of new technologies applied

in agriculture and rural life. Our committee selections were excellent. Each member contributed considerable time, energy, and many constructive suggestions. The Resources The major preconference Planning Committee

meeting was in October of last year. This meeting had two purposes. One was to

identify and discuss the pressing issues that would be at the focus of a national meeting. The second was to establish the personal

relationships that would help facilitate the Committee process through the many months

of planning.

Helping us set an agenda for a preservation conference were two documents: one a report on digital preservation, the other an action plan for presenting print information. The first item is the report Preserving Digital Information, prepared by a task force appointed by the Commission on Presentation and Access and the Research Libraries Group

(RLG). This report, written by Co-Chairs Donald Waters, Associate University Librarian

at Yale, and John Garrett, CyberVillages

Corporation, with input from task force members, framed the key problems that need

to be resolved to ensure continuing access to

digital documents. The Planning Committee drew four major points from that report:

1 . That digital migration is more than

"refreshing" or rewriting digital information. Data migration is a specific

set of tasks which must be followed when

transferring information from one

hardware/software configuration to another, or when moving from one

generation of computing to another.

2. Digital archives are distinct from digital libraries in the sense that digital libraries are repositories that collect or provide

access to digital information but may or may not provide the long term storage for that information.

3. Digital archives must be certified by an independent program.

4. The preservation responsibility initially rests with the creator or owner of the

information. This last point is critical. A

digital dissemination system is fluid and

dynamic, with a single master generating

multiple copies. Responsibility for the

preservation of that master copy must

reside with the creator of that document.

This responsibility may be delegated to others, but when this is done, the delegation must be visible, clear and

lawful. The report also calls for discipline-specific preservation plans and pilot programs. The second document is a presentation action plan adopted in 1993 by USAIN. This document, A National Preservation Program

for Agricultural Literature, was prepared by a

consultant, Nancy Gwinn, of the Smithsonian

Institution, with assistance from the USAIN

Advisory Panel on Presentation. The plan envisioned a systematic, organized, and

coordinated national program combined with

local initiatives. The plan also anticipated a need for sustained digital presentation efforts by recommending the implementation of scanning technologies to lay the groundwork

39
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

for electronic access to preserved agricultural

literature.

This plan has received national recognition as a sound model for a discipline-specific preservation program. This approach fits well with the objectives of the conference, since we

were attempting to preserve not all government information, just the narrow slice from the USDA.

Key points of the plan include:

1 . Preservation efforts must employ all relevant archival preservation standards and guidelines.

2 Preservation techniques used will not

require uncommon or proprietary equipment.

3. All preserved materials will have

bibliographic access.

4. All preserved materials are to be made

easily available at low or no cost to the

user. These points either matched or fit closely those

of the RLG report. The two documents

provided a strong policy and organizational base detailed enough to facilitate action and

flexible enough to accommodate unusual

situations. ...

The national plan provides a framework for action by dividing the broad universe of

agricultural literature into smaller, more

manageable pieces. A key player is NAL,

which has assumed responsibility for the preservation of Federal documents in print. It seemed worthwhile for the conference

participants, including NAL, to consider if it were practical to extend the responsibility of preservation of digital information to one

central organization, or if the responsibility needed to be distributed over numerous

institutions, possibly making the process more

manageable.

The Sharpshooter

Experience with the USAIN national preservation plan also led the Planning Committee to agree to hire a consultant to prepare a digital action plan. Beyond the fact that preparing the plan would be extremely

complex, the credibility of the plan author would be a crucial factor when the document

was distributed for peer review within the USDA, USAIN, professional societies and

other bodies. We were pleased to have Paul F. Uhlir agree

to work with us. Paul, a lawyer and

experienced staff member of the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences, recently coordinated a national panel of experts associated with the earth sciences data and edited the final report. Paul advised the Planning Committee on many

topics as the planning process developed, and

later sen/ed as Conference Facilitator. Conclusion

As you can see, planning for the Conference

required coordinating many issues. In the end we had a successful meeting and established

the foundation for a digital preservation plan. The following two speakers, Evelyn Frangakis and Paul Uhlir, will describe these to you in more detail. Resources

Preserving Digital Information: Report of the Task Force on Archiving of Digital Information Commission on Preservation and Access, Research Library Group

Principal authors: Donald Waters, Yale

University, John Garrett, CyberVillages Corp.

http://lyra.rig.org/ArchTF/tfadi.index.htm

National Preservation Plan for Agricultural

Libraries USAIN Advisory Panel on Preservation

Principal author: Nancy Gwinn, Smithsonian

Institution

(Copies available from Gregory Lawrence) 40
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

Report on the Meeting USDA Digital

Publications: Creating a Preservation Action Plan

Evelyn Frangakis

National Agricultural Library

Beltsville, MD

Given that a number of U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) agencies have begun

publishing exclusively in electronic form, the National Agricultural Library) NAL and other key stakeholders and responsible parties believe it is essential to develop a preservation plan for digital USDA publications as soon as possible. Such a plan will need to be developed together with the Department's

Chief Information Officer and key

representatives of all USDA agencies, other responsible Federal Government entities, such

as the Government Printing Office (GPO) and

the National Archives and Records

Administration (NARA), the land-grant

university libraries, and other non-governmental institutions and groups in the agricultural community. The NAL, with the Economic Research Service

of the USDA (ERS), GPO, Cornell University, and the Farm Foundation, recently took the

first step in a cooperative venture by

convening a 2-day meeting, held March

3-4,1997 in Washington, DC, with

representatives of many of the above groups to begin to identify the major elements and

requirements of such a plan. Under the auspices of the NAL, the meeting was

organized by Cornell University's Albert R. Mann Library. The meeting served as a call to action to develop a preservation strategy for USDA digital publications. A number of key agencies were represented and provided support and input to the task at hand. Tom Kalil, Senior Director, White House National Economic Council, presented

the keynote address and provided the broad

administrative approach. He discussed

research, technology, publication trends, and

information policy matters. Kalil noted the

cost-effectiveness of this digital technology on

a life cycle basis. Trends on the technology side include:

1 . Storage costs are dropping dramatically.

2. Archiving of multimedia - what will we do

with object-oriented databases?

3. The rate of technological change is enormous - archiving of software and

machine.

4. Archivists are interested in broader context

of information as well as information - how is that preserved in a digital world? There are some technologies and standards

that will make it easier to read digital information. Some new directions in information policy noted include:

• The transfer to digital should be relatively easy (costs are decreasing rapidly).

• Agencies need to think about how

information is generated to prepare for its management and preservation.

• The notion of going from hot lists to wish

lists (People are taking the subject domain

by looking at what's out there on the

Internet. It would be better to have

41
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

domain experts look at what should be out

there.)

• The movement toward communities of

interest, which are based on shared

motivation rather than geography. Communities of interest are often engaged

in sharing information, communication,

transactions (ex: BioNet- includes

different threaded news groups). They

demonstrate increasing returns - those communities that are large will get larger with time. Are they worth archiving? Could they be useful to historians in understanding how decisions were made? Who is responsible for archiving the information? Anne Thomson Reed, Acting Chief Information

Officer, Office of Information and Records Management (OIRM), discussed the need to manage information now in order to keep it for the future. She reiterated Abraham Lincoln's

vision as he established the Department, "to acquire and diffuse among the people of the United States useful information on subjects connected with agriculture." To ensure this information would be there for future generations, Lincoln committed the Department to "acquiring and preserving all information concerning agriculture."

Catherine E. Woteki, Acting Under Secretary

for Research, Education and Economics, noted

that the ideas generated at the meeting will have long-reaching benefits for future researchers, analysts, educators, and the public

in accessing the vast body of information produced by the USDA.

Pru Adier, Assistant Executive Director, Federal

Relations and Information Policy, Association

of Research Libraries, addressed "Issues and

Challenges in the Long-Term Retention of

Digital Publications." The key themes of her

talk were:

1 ) the context for change-why new models

are needed;

2) the need to build and develop new

infrastructures for networked-based

presenilation and access activities; and

3) a call to initiate additional preservation programs and pilots. AdIer reported on efforts of the National Research Council and joint efforts of the Commission on Preservation and Access and

the Research Libraries Group. She mentioned

the following common themes:

• Preservation of information resources,

especially digital format, merits additional focus and support;

• Archival and preservation responsibilities

rest with the creator and/or owner and

digital archives may act as fail-safe mechanisms to protect valuable

information resources for future use;

• Adoption of the life-cycle concept - creation, access, maintenance, and

preservation issues - should be addressed

at the point of origin;

• The development of a decentralized system of archive centers;

• Development of these distribution centers

or a federation is fundamentally different from current archival and presen^/ation

practices;

• Issues relating to standards, education,

funding, and competing technologies are

critical; and

• Pilot projects and programs will both

explore and resolve some key issues and

serve as a means to manage the transition

to the digital, networked environment. The land-grant perspective was offered by Sam

Demas, meeting co-chair and head of collection development and preservation at the

Albert Mann Library at Cornell University. Sam discussed the preservation arena and laid out premises on which the meeting was based. 42
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

Greg Lawrence, government information

librarian at Cornell University, spoke about the measure of the challenge presented in preserving digital USDA information. The day's first panel, on existing models for long-term retention of digital information, was

moderated by project consultant Paul Uhlir and included:

• Hedy RossmeissI, Senior Program

Administrator for Data and Information

Delivery, U.S. Geological Survey;

• Richard Davis, Data Administrator, National Climatic Data Center, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA);

• Janet Vavra, Technical Director

inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR); and

• Kurt Molholm, Administrator, Defense

Technical Information Center. Each of the panelists discussed in detail his or her agency's/organization's existing program

for retaining digital information. A second panel, composed of responsible

parties and key stakeholders, included

representatives from:

• the National Agricultural Library - Pamela

Q.J. Andre, Director;

• the research community - represented by

Bruce Wiersma, Dean, College of Natural Resources, Forestry, and Agriculture, University of Maine;

• the Government Printing Office - Wayne

Kelley, Superintendent of Documents, and

• the National Archives and Records

Administration - Thomas Brown, Chief, Archival Services Branch, Center for Electronic Records.

NAL Director Pam Andre set the context for the panel by talking about NAL's mission, its progress to date in preservation efforts, and its challenge in presenting electronic formats. Bruce Wiersma provided the user research

perspective, with examples from his own and

graduate student's work. Wayne Kelley, Superintendent of Documents, GPO, discussed the mission for the Federal Depository Library Program and the strategic plan for transition to a more electronic depository program. He also discussed a study on the assessment of agency plans and

standards for creation and dissemination of electronic information products; depository program authority; and USDA publications in the depository program (current counts and

digital future). Tom Brown, Chief, Archival Services Branch, Center for Electronic Records, NARA, noted

that over 1,000 automated information systems

are creating and processing information of permanent value, including 29 automated

information systems within USDA. NARA's

strategic plan includes the commitment to develop and refine standards for a distributed system that allows physical custody of archival

material, particularly, electronic records

material, outside of its facilities when feasible.

Part of the implementation of the plan is a dialogue with Federal agencies and NARA's

constituents on a wide range of records management issues, which includes a complete review of NARA's guidance to agencies on electronic records.

At the end of the first day, Paul Uhlir led a plenary discussion of models and issues in digital records retention and provided

participants with homework to prepare them

for the task of the second day. The first day set the stage for work ahead by providing models

and perspectives of responsible parties and key

stakeholders. The second day was devoted to action. Participants were assigned to one of four breakout groups, which met all morning,

to address a range of questions on a given

issue in order to work toward drafting a

preservation action plan. The following 43
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

elements of a plan were discussed in some

detail:

• the management framework and related

institutional roles and responsibilities, both

inside the Department and externally, in the long-term preservation of digital USDA

publications;

• the underlying technological infrastructure and technical document management

requirements;

• the development of long-term retention : . criteria and processes for digital USDA

publications; and

• the main issues in long-term user access to and retrieval of those digital publications. The afternoon was devoted to breakout group

report results and a plenary discussion of the elements of a national plan. Based on the

results of this recent meeting, an initial preservation plan will be developed over the next few months for discussion within the Department. This preliminary plan will identify what needs to be done in the near term as well as over an extended period of time, the principal USDA agencies involved, and the resources required. It will serve as a discussion draft for obtaining commitment and

support to proceed with this important

initiative.

Project Consultant Paul Uhlir will now discuss

the results of the conference.

44
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

Key Considerations in the Long-Term Retention

of Digital Information

Paul F. Uhlir

National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council Washington, DC

Introduction My presentation will provide an overview of the key elements that need to be considered in developing and implementing a plan for the long-term retention of digital information. Some of these elements, of course, are the same as for paper documents. Others are

similar or analogous, while others are unique.

I have organized the discussion according to four topical areas. The first is the development

of retention and purging criteria and processes. The second involves technical document management issues. The third focuses on

considerations of long-term user access and

retrieval of public Government information. And the final area encompasses institutional roles and responsibilities, including financial aspects. Because the preservation plan that is being

developed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture USDA) is still very much in a preliminary draft form, I will not discuss the

specific actions and recommendations in that

project. Rather, I will provide a summary of the major elements that need to be considered

in the development of any new program for the preservation of public digital documents, and will draw on examples from the USDA

and other Government agency activities to

illustrate my points. Development of Retention and Purging

Criteria and Processes We begin with the questions what? and why?

Certainly the threshold question in developing

a preservation plan for digital documents is defining the universe of information that will be preserved, and providing a well-understood

rationale for its preservation. The broad

reasons for saving digital information are the same as for paper documents: it is their

historical significance, the intellectual achievement they represent, and their potential

social, cultural, or economic value. Of course,

there are more specific reasons that are dependent on institutional context, the nature

of the information product, and the anticipated end users. You all are familiar with the criteria for published literature-books, reports, articles, and the like-so let me focus briefly instead on

retention criteria for electronic scientific data, which may be less familiar to you.

For example, there are significant differences

in the need for long-term retention of experimental and observational data. Data from laboratory experiments in such areas as chemistry or materials science typically are reproducible, since the validity of any

experiment depends on whether its results can be reproduced independently by other

researchers. Thus, except perhaps in very

large and expensive experiments, there is little need to keep the original, primary data once

the results have been published and the experiment independently verified. Instead, the data that are of greatest long-term value are compilations of highly evaluated data that can be used repeatedly by other researchers as

reliable reference points.

In the observational sciences, however, such

as astronomy or environmental sciences, the

research itself is dependent on the data

45
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

themselves, which can be processed and

interpreted at different levels of complexity.'

Typically, each level of processing adds value

to the original, raw data by summarizing the

original product, synthesizing a new data product, or providing some interpretation of the original data. The processing of data leads

to an inherent paradox that might not be

readily apparent. The original unprocessed, or minimally processed, data are usually the most

difficult to understand or use by anyone other than the expert primary user. With every

successive level of processing or interpretation, the data tend to become more understandable and better documented for the nonexpert,

general user. One might therefore assume that

it is the most highly processed or evaluated

observational data that have the greatest value

for long-term preservation, as in the case of the experimental laboratory sciences, because

such data are more easily understood by a broad spectrum of potential end users. In fact, just the opposite is usually the case for observational data, because it is only with the

original, unprocessed data that it will be

possible to recreate all other levels of processed data and data products. Thus, while

laboratory scientists value most highly the evaluated data compilations, researchers in the observational sciences typically want all reliable original observations to be saved, because most observations are unique and

non-reproducible, and the original data can be

used repeatedly and in different ways in future research.

This one example highlights not only some of the differences in developing preservation

criteria for different types of information

products, but also between paper and digital products. Digitally generated observational data pose a significant challenge in volume

and in proper documentation and preparation,

that are not inherent in data recorded on paper

or even in most other digital information

products. The situation is becoming

increasingly complicated by the generation of hybrid, multimedia information that may

include text, numerical data, animation, sound and video all in one product, and that furthermore may include self-executing

programs that will automatically update or

revise that product over time. The development of retention criteria for

digital information is thus more complex and

less straightforward than for paper

publications, although some of the basic considerations will remain the same in both

types of media.

Issues that might be considered in the long- term retention and life-cycle management of

digital information products include:

• Legal restrictions

• Cost

• Documentation/metadata

• Quality control/quality assurance

• Provenance/authority/authentication, and

• Other context-specific issues

Legal restrictions include national security, privacy, and various intellectual property

rights, similar to the paper paradigm. A

potential significant difference may arise with

regard to adequately sorting out intellectual property rights in hybrid digital information products which might integrate dozens or even

hundreds of sources. The costs arise from the labor required to evaluate and subsequently manage the digital information, as well from the technological

infrastructure, as discussed later. Documentation, also referred to as metadata, is especially important for scientific data and

other esoteric information products that require some ancillary explanation to facilitate their use. Digital data that are so lacking in documentation that even an expert in the same

discipline is unable to understand them are obvious candidates for the trash bin, unless

their originator can be found and persuaded to make them intelligible. The physical separation of explanatory documentation from

the data themselves should be avoided.

Quality control and assurance is another

retention criterion that needs to be considered

in whether to preserve an information product. 46
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

One method appropriate for both paper and

digital information is peer review. In contrast

to paper products, however, electronic information may become corrupted due to technical deterioration or anomaly, or through

the intentional or accidental introduction of

errors as a result of use. What makes the

quality control even more difficult for electronic information is that sometimes the problems, such as viruses, are not readily apparent and may lie dormant until some

future point. Provenance and authentication have parallel importance for both paper and digital forms, but pose more problems in the electronic

context. As in the case of quality control, the

original and authentic version may be difficult to ascertain, and fraudulent or illegal modifications can be made that are difficult or impossible to detect.

Issues that might be considered in purging or deeper archiving of documents include:

• Age of document

• Physical condition

• Cost

• Use history, and again

• Other context-specific issues The implementation procedures for retaining and purging documents are also likely to differ from the paper model. Digital information products are more voluminous, varied, and complex than their paper counterparts, and

therefore require a broader range of expertise

for their proper evaluation and become more

labor intensive and costly to screen. Technical Document Management Issues A detailed discussion of the hardware and

software requirements for long-term retention

of digital publications is beyond the scope of

this presentation, and of course in any event is largely determined by the technological

infrastructure that is already in place. Certainly one bit of good advice is to spend the time to do thorough background research to find out what are the technical "best practices" for

long-term retention that can be derived from

the experiences of other similar programs. Choosing the right technologies is a decision

that should not be made lightly and there are many well-known horror stories. The

acquisition or upgrading of the necessary

information technologies is likely to be the

single largest cost associated with the

preservation of digital information, although many of those costs can be shared and

integrated with the institution's overall information technology requirements. Indeed,

it is essential that the preservation function-or, more accurately, the information life-cycle management considerations-be expressly included in the planning and procurement of information technologies for the entire

institution. There are several technical requirements or

functions that are especially important to long- term preservation that should be mentioned

here. Acceptable document formats and media for long-term retention need to be

chosen in conjunction with the institution's information creators and information

technologists. Costs can be reduced if the formats for both creating and preserving the information are the same, and interoperable technologies are used. The transfer of all digital information products from old media to new media on a regularly scheduled basis is essential. There have been many instances of old tapes deteriorating and becoming unreadable, or of lacking equipment

that can read the information stored on

obsolete media. This is a non-trivial problem,

as I'm sure you are all aware. How many

different word processing programs have you

used in the past 10 years just in the course of your daily office work, and how much

information do you still have on 5 1/4 inch

diskettes that you have not migrated onto 3 1/4 inch diskettes? Institutions that have several decades of large-scale experience in this, such

as the NOAA National Data Centers, currently

transfer the information on 10-year cycles. Related to this requirement is the need for providing physically separate back-up facilities and environmentally controlled storage 47
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

conditions for both the primary and the back- up locations.

Finally, system security protocols must be

established that effectively balance the need

for open systems that allow for easy user access against the need for security against accidental or intentional destruction of either the technology or the information itself. Long-term User Access to and Retrieval of Public Digital Information The next important issue area involves the planning and implementation of long-term user access to and retrieval of public digital information. As in the other topical areas there

is a lot of overlap between paper and digital information, particularly with regard to legal and policy requirements that you all know

better than I. I will focus instead on some of the key differences. Undoubtedly, the most significant difference is the vastly expanded universe of users who are now able to access and retrieve information

remotely. This is a true shift in paradigm from

the paper model. Although it is true that only

a small percent of the population has ready

desk-top access to on-line information, that number will grow inexorably, and in fact, almost everyone can now go to a library or other Internet source and establish remote

access. Thus the focus of planning for providing access to the information and related user services needs to shift from perhaps dozens of on-site clients using the stacks to thousands of remote clients on a daily basis. The following guidelines are useful to adopt,

consistent with the need to maintain a customer orientation:

• Provide equitable access and retrieval services to all potential users;

• Minimize technical, regulatory, and cost

barriers to access and retrieval;

• Make the information as easy to find and

use as possible, while protecting

confidential or proprietary information, and

• Establish a means for users to provide input and for your organization to respond to

that input.

Starting with this last guideline first, one of the most difficult tasks is to be responsive to the

vastly enlarged body of end users in the networked environment, particularly when

you first provide on-line access. One mistake

is to assume that the distribution of categories

of end users will remain the same as with

those who physically visited your facility. While you can be reasonably certain that your

on-site visitors have a very specific objective and information need in coming to your

facility, your on-line visitors are much more

likely to be more diffuse and less focused than

individuals who have to make a substantial commitment in time and perhaps expense in making their trip to you. Also, the demographics will change, with an obvious emphasis on those user groups who have

ready access to the Internet. Although it may

be difficult to anticipate at the outset what the primary on-line user requirements and interests may be, the good news is that you can easily track the types of users electronically and

develop a customer distribution profile quite

quickly. One absolute necessity, whether the information products are all available on-line or not, is a comprehensive on-line directory or

catalog, preferably in some multi-level format

that will bring the user from the general to the

specific. This service, although time consuming and expensive to develop, is invaluable to fully realizing the information

transfer potential. Another important piece of advice is to use a proven professional Web designer, rather than an in-house technologist. A seasoned expert

will be sure to cover all the essential features- and many you may not even think of by

yourself-in working with you to optimize your Web site for your needs.

48
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

One feature that ought to be included is a means for customers to provide feedback and

useful suggestions. In addition, it may be

important to appoint an advisory body of knowledgeable representatives from major end

user groups. Such a formal advisory

mechanism can be helpful not only with

successfully maintaining a customer

orientation, but in providing advice on major

decision points such as the development of

retention and purging criteria.

Institutional Responsibilities and Relationships

Finally, there are the various organizational

roles, responsibilities, and relationships that need to be worked out. Again, many of these

will be similar, or at least build upon, the organizational models used in the paper

paradigm. Within a large Federal department

or agency, there are many internal institutional links that need to be established and

responsibilities agreed upon. Under current Federal law, the principal information policy and planning function resides in the Office of the Chief Information Officer. However, the

lead entity for developing and implementing a preservation plan within each Federal organization will likely vary. In the Department of Agriculture, for example, the

logical focal point is the National Agricultural

Library. In addition, the successful implementation of a preservation plan is dependent on the active participation of the information creators throughout the entire

institution and even outside it, to the extent

that the institution preserves information products that are created by contractors or

grantees. All of these parties need to be

involved in the planning process and claim some ownership to its results in order to make

it work. Of course, there are some essential external

responsibilities and relationships that need to be considered. Governmental organizations

outside a Federal department such as the USDA that have an important role in the preservation and dissemination of public

digital information include the National Archives and Records Administration, the

Government Printing Office and its Federal Depository Library Program, the National Technical Information Service, and various other Federal and State Government

institutions. Among the nongovernmental

entities that have an important function vis-a- vis the Department of Agriculture are the land- grant university libraries, and the aforementioned user groups and contractors and grantees. A key difference between the paper and digital organizational considerations is that the

electronic networked environment allows for a more highly distributed system with

specialized functions, without having to physically locate all documents that need to be

preserved in a centralized repository. Indeed,

the physical location of digital information can be completely transparent to the end user, allowing for more flexible and responsive

organizational structures that are optimized for function and cost. The challenge for the Department of Agriculture now is to create a management structure that will take advantage

of these distributed attributes both internally and externally, while maintaining just enough

authority and control to realize all its important

objectives and requirements.

This brings me to the last issue, the unavoidable financial aspects. The good news

is that a carefully designed and implemented

preservation plan that takes advantage of broadly distributed functions can minimize the need for additional funding and spread the

costs across a large number of organizations. The bad news is that it will not come without a

price, and that new funds will have to be found in an era of reduced Federal funding. Because of the public good nature of this

activity, the preferred option would be to seek an augmentation to the annual appropriations.

In the event that direct appropriations or reprogramming of funds cannot cover the full costs, it may be necessary to charge user fees

for certain products or sen/ices. In that case, some level of basic access should be kept free

if at all possible.

49
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

1. National Research Council (1995), Preserving Scientific Data on Our Physical Universe: A New Strategy for Archiving Our

Nation's Scientific Information Resources,

National Academy Press, Washington, DC.

The views expressed in this presentation are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the National Academy of Sciences or the National Research Council.

m
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

Bureau of the Census Update

]ohn C. Kavaliunas

Bureau of the Census

Washington, DC

It's a pleasure to address this audience once

again and tell you about some new

developments at the Census Bureau. We at the Bureau are well aware of the vital link that

libraries, particularly the government documents librarians, play in disseminating and explaining Census Bureau information to the public.

Before I tell you about future plans, let me

preface my remarks with three general observations about data dissemination

directions at the Census Bureau: Internet, fees, and future access. All three of these are very much intertwined. Observation 1: Internet

Internet usage continues to grow, offering opportunities to reach a much wider audience

than ever before. The Census Bureau, early on, saw the potential of the Internet and we

are actively moving towards our goal of making the Internet a primary means of disseminating our information.

• Currently we are receiving more than 2 million "hits" per week.

• We have been on the top ten list of government sites for the last 3 years, and

next to White House, probably the second most visited Federal site.

• Several report series, such as the Current

Industrial Reports and the Population

Estimates and Projections, are available primarily on the Internet. In March of this year we stopped printing our foreign trade

reports in paper, the FT 925 series, and

published the information on the Internet.

• We've also begun to make some changestechnical upgrades in some cases-to our

products and begun to integrate across the various media. Let me give you two

examples: The new 1996 Statistical Abstract on CD-ROM is Internet-compatible so that users can go back and forth from the CD to the census tables on the World Wide Web with a click of the mouse. Some topical reports in the P-series—

Foreign Born Population, Geographic

Mobility, for example—will be in print one year with updated tables on the

Internet the following year. We are also grappling internally with many of the same issues that are facing the library community: How do we strike a balance between print and electronic media, timeliness and archivability, and so forth. We are aware

of these issues and will continue to work with you, with the Government Printing Office (GPO), and with other organizations to develop solutions that benefit the user.

But the point I want to make is that Internet has changed and will continue to substantially change the way we disseminate data. Observation 2: Fees What makes the Internet so attractive is that users have a virtual library at their desks. And,

for the most part, it's available to anyone for

free. But a concurrent development, and one

that is at odds with the culture of the information highway, is that the Census

Bureau, like other agencies, has been asked by

51
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

Congress and the Administration to supplement budgets through user fees and

from the sale of products.

Last month we began a subscription service, CenStats. CenStats is a cautious step forward

for the Census Bureau in recouping additional revenues through the sale of our products. Just about all the information and features currently available on our Internet site will remain there

for free, as weH-as similar types of information

in the future. However, CenStats will provide

additional enhanced access that will make it easier or more convenient for the user. Initial offerings include:

• A geocoding application-that is, the ability to code online street addresses to census

tracts.

• Additional look-up capabilities for detailed information by product code for imports and exports from the FT 925 series.

• Access to several of our CD-ROM products

including USA Counties, County Business

Patterns and Zip Business Patterns.

Future developments planned at this time

include access to historical data bases of both demographic and business data. We are working with the Government Printing Office to provide access to the CenStats for Federal depository libraries. This free access

will not be limited to a single machine, but it will be limited to the single physical location

of the library. Observation 3: Future Access Given the availability of the Internet, shrinking budgets, and user needs, we believe we are heading in the right direction in planning for an Internet-accessible data delivery system that

will enable users to customize the information they need. We are developing a system known as DADS. This Data Access and

Dissemination System will provide interactive electronic access to prepackaged data

tabulations, data documentation, and online

help, as well as allow users to build their own

tabulations from the census records. We

currently have a prototype available and have been working with the Federal Depository

Library Program, the American Library Association, the Special Libraries Association and other representatives of the library community to define and beta test this initial version of the system. Eventually the various

search and access features of our Internet site will merge to provide seamless access to Census data. With this as background, let me tell you about some major activities-economic and decennial

censuses, as well as some new products, just released or on the horizon. 1997 Economic Censuses The next major data collection effort will begin

in early 1998, that is the 1997 Economic

Census. The 1 997 Economic Census will be the first census to report economic data by North American Industrial Classification Code

(NAICS), a joint U.S.-Canada-Mexico system

that replaces the old Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code based on a 1930's manufacturing economy. There are 20 NAICS

sectors, as opposed to the 1 1 SIC divisions. For example, many new service categories such as information and health have been

added. The "information sector" covers 34

industries: Software and database publishing,

on-line retrieval services; Satellite, cellular and

pager communications; Motion picture, video and sound recording; and Radio, television, and cable broadcasting. The old "services division" has been divided

into 8 new sectors with 154 new industries recognized. The new sectors include

Professional, scientific and technical services; Health care and social assistance, including

HMOs; Administrative and support, waste management and remediation services, which

include telephone answering sen/ices, telemarketing, etc.; and Arts, entertainment, and recreation. 52
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

A Federal Register notice appeared earlier this month, and a NAICS manual is scheduled for release by the Office of Management and

Budget this fall. If you need more information on NAICS, look behind the economic

indicators clock on our Internet home page. The first release of data from this census will be a new report that combines data from all sectors. We are looking to release this report within a year of the census-that is, early 1 999.

But, in general, you can expect fewer printed

reports from the 1997 Economic Census; in fact, about 75 percent fewer printed reports, but more data on CD-ROM, especially in PDF

format.

For more information on the census plans, see "Looking FoPA^ard to the 1 997 Economic

Census" on our Web site. There you will find sample forms for all the censuses, publicity

materials, etc. Reference materials, such as what used to be available in the Guide to the Economic Censuses, will be available on the

Internet. You should also note that responsibility for the Census of Agriculture, usually taken in conjunction with the Economic Census, has been shifted to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Census 2000

Let me update you on plans for the next

census.

In April, as required by law, we presented to Congress the topics that we propose to put on

the questionnaire.

• In response to Congress's wanting to reduce the reporting burden, we are proposing the shortest short form in 1 80

years. We are proposing six population and one housing question: name, age, sex, relationship, race, Hispanic origin and whether you own or rent your home.

1 990 short form questions - marital status.

units in structure, value/rent, and number

of rooms - will become sample items.

• There is one new subject proposed for the long form-grandparents as caregivers-as

required by the welfare reform act. Five

subjects will be dropped: children ever born (fertility), year last worked, source of water, sewage disposal, and condominium

status.

It should be noted that Congress has given no

indication that it supports a long form in 2000. Next spring we will present to Congress the

actual questions that should appear on the questionnaire. There is an Interagency committee looking into a redo of OMB Directive 1 5, that is, how

race/ethnicity are reported, particularly as regards the 2000 census questionnaire. Under

consideration are the following 3 options: including a multi-racial question to the census

questionnaire; allowing people to check as many racial categories as they require, rather than just 1; and lastly, combining

race/ethnicity and ancestry into one question. The committee's recommendation is due this summer, followed by a public comment period and the issuance of a directive in October. Regarding decennial census products, they are

yet to be defined, but I can tell you a few

things: we plan to produce printed reports from the census, CD-ROMs, and other

electronic data sets or predefined tables that can be accessed through the Internet. I can

also tell you there will be fewer printed

reports, CD-ROMs, and even predefined tables than there were in 1990. But users will have

the ability to specify and tailor tabulations through the Data Access and Dissemination System (DADS) that I mentioned earlier. Other New Products

Zip Business Patterns - A new standard product

offered for the first time this fall. Zip Business

Patterns will be an annual release. Like its companion product. County Business Patterns, 53
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

it provides information on the number of establishments and employees by SIC code,

but for areas smaller than a county.

Statistical Abstract - The 1996 CD-ROM is available. Several different file formats are available on the disc to help you access the information you need. There are also links from the CD-ROM directly to the appropriate pages on our Internet site. Landview Mf- Scheduled for release in early

fall, the new Landview product, which combines mapping software with Census

Bureau data, will be Windows compatible,

with updated geography, and with additional software features that will make it easier to run and to import your own data. Look for information on the TIGER pages of our Internet

site.

In Conclusion: To sum up, let me reiterate:

• The Census Bureau is relying on the

Internet as a dissemination medium,

particularly as we move towards the 1 997

Economic Census, the Data Access and

Dissemination System, and Census 2000.

• Our products are changing to take advantage of the capabilities offered by the

Internet.

• We are making a cautious first step to recover additional revenues through a

subscription service that will provide enhanced access to data.

• Lastly, we will continue to work with GPO

and the library community to develop

solutions to some of the unresolved issues that we are facing together.

54
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

Agency Update: the Small Business

Administration

John Ward

Small Business Administration Washington, DC

Compared to the larger Federal agencies that are engaged in publishing research and

statistics, the Small Business Administration

(SBA) is something of a poor relation: It's a small agency (some 4,513 employees

nationwide, compared to some 34,228

employed by an organization such as the Commerce Department), it is relatively new (it only came into existence in 1953), and its publication function is somewhat limited, since its primary focus is on program delivery

(issuing loan guarantees, administering

procurement assistance programs, running a

disaster loan program, etc.), rather than publishing statistics or research. About the SBA

The Small Business Administration is engaged

primarily in writing loan guarantees issued by bank lenders to small businesses, in administering a disaster assistance program, and in offering counseling and technical

assistance to small businesses. It delivers its services through a network of some 84 SBA

field offices, as well as through Business

Information Centers (BICs), and One-Stop

Capital Shops.

It also delivers counseling and assistance through some "resource partners," such as the Service Corps of Retired Executives (SCORE), a network of over 400 chapters staffed by some

12,400 volunteers, and through over 900

Small Business Development Centers (SBDCs),

a business assistance effort co-funded by the SBA and state governments.

Getting Information about the SBA

The simplest way of getting basic information about the Small Business Administration-from

office locations and telephone numbers to the

text of many information pamphlets-is by

consulting its home page on the World Wide

Web at <ttp://www.sbaonline.sba.gov>

.

Basic information is also available to the public from the Small Business Answer Desk (800- 827-5722), a toll-free information line that is accessible 24 hours a day. Another valuable information resource is the

U.S. Business Advisor, a one-stop electronic

link to all the business information and

services that the Federal Government provides.

It is located at <http://www.business.gov>. SBA Publications

Broadly speaking, the SBA publishes two types

of materials. The first type, "general"

publications, consisting primarily of pamphlets and other ephemera, are intended as brief guides to the agency's services and programs. The second type of published material consists

of publications that are of a more technical

nature. They include:

• statistical publications;

• research reports;

• legal and administrative publications, and

• official reports required by law. The first group of materials will probably

continue to be printed and disseminated in the

55
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

same manner in which they have in the past: that is, they will be print products produced

through the Government Printing Office (GPO)

(thereby making their way to depository

libraries in the traditional way) and distributed

to SBA field offices and the public at no

charge. Some of them-a group of publications

consisting of the old "management aids" series- -are offered for sale through an SBA sales outlet in Denver, and will continue to be

distributed that way.^ The only change that is occurring with this group of publications at the present time is that the information contained

in some of them is now being posted to the SBA's site on the World Wide Web.

The second group of publications-the

technical and research publications-contains those that are probably of most interest to document and reference librarians, and will be

the focus of this update. They are also the group of publications most likely to go

"fugitive"-that is, public documents that are unrecorded, uncataloged, not distributed to depository libraries, and therefore unavailable

to the public-in the face of budget cut-backs and rapidly evolving technology.

It is to avoid this problem of fugitive documents that the SBA recently undertook a number of steps to ensure that its publications

are cataloged and made available to depository libraries and the public. Core Technical and Research Publications The most basic of the SBA's technical and

research publications-its "core" publicationsinclude:

• Annual reports, including the SBA's annual

report, the annual report of the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program, the annual report of the chief

financial officer, and other such reports;

• Economic and statistical reports, such as The State of Small Business: A Report of the President (an annual economic report

that is similar to the Economic Report of the President), the Handbook of Small

Business Data (a periodically revised

collection of statistical data), and the Small

Business Answer Card;

• Research finding aids, such as the Catalog

of Small Business Research (a bibliographic guide to the SBA's funded research reports

that are available from the National Technical Information Service); and

• Certain legally mandated reports, such as special reports to Congress, the quarterly

report of the inspector general, and the

quarterly SBIR solicitation announcements.

Another, ancillary group of technical publications includes:

• Administrative documents, such as the SBA's standard operating procedures

(SOPs), regulations, and industry size standards;

• Legal documents, such as the Legislation Handbook and the Opinion Digest; and

• Public affairs documents, such as press

releases. Most of these items have, in the past, been

print products that were produced and made

available to the public in the traditional manner: that is, they were printed at GPO and

then either given away upon request or sold through the Superintendent of Documents'

sales program. Over the past several years, a number of

factors have conspired to change the document production and delivery process at the SBA. Some (or even most) of these developments are common to other Government agencies and include reduced

staffing, budget cut-backs, program recisions,

etc. Other factors are more technology driven, such as the implementation of desktop

publishing systems, the increasing cost- effectiveness of short-run, in-house printing equipment (such as Xerox's Docutech system), 56
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

and the ability to release publications in an

electronic format (through the Internet, on CD- ROM, on diskette, etc.).

This scenario will be familiar to anyone who

has had to deal with Federal publications in the past few years. Improving Access to Documents

For documents that are falling off the

traditional path to publication and

dissemination, what is being done at the SBA? A number of steps, some of them tentative, others quite definite, have been taken recently.

Identification of Fugitive Documents One of the first steps the SBA has taken was to identify documents that make up its core documents group. Among other things, this task entailed making up a list of documents

that have either never, or only sporadically, been printed through GPO, and therefore may

not have entered into the bibliographic record.

Establishment of Closer Ties with the Superintendent of Documents

The old, automatic system of document

cataloging and delivery to depository libraries that presumed all printing was done by GPO

had clearly begun to break down with the turn

to in-house duplication in the mid-1990s. In September 1996, officials of both the Library Programs Service of the Superintendent of Documents and the SBA met to discuss ways

of better insuring that the agency's documents

were sent to the Superintendent of Documents

for cataloging and distribution to depository

libraries. This initiative has already brought

into the bibliographic stream several SBA

publications that might have ended up as

fugitive documents.

Bibliographic Control of Serial Titles

Occasionally, some SBA serial titles were

either never printed, never truly disseminated

outside of a small group, never cataloged, or never assigned ISSNs. Searches conducted on

OCLC and at the Library of Congress

confirmed the existence of this problem. The

agency has begun to rectify this situation by

working with the National Serials Data Program to get ISSNs assigned to its serial

titles, encouraging program offices to identify and number their documents consistently (and include the ISSN), and to divert copies that are duplicated in-house to the Superintendent of Documents for depository library distribution.

Creation of GILS Records While the Government Information Locator

Service (GILS) may have been intended for something other than bibliographic control, its usefulness in this regard cannot be overstated.

If nothing else, it creates a bureaucratic imperative to recognize that certain documents

need to be published and made available to the public (unfortunately, the two are not always the same thing in the Federal Government!). The SBA's GILS site is posted to the World Wide Web at < http://www.sbaonline.sba.gov/gils/> . The

GILS site is an important one to check for SBA

information, both print and electronic. For the

first time, a nearly comprehensive list of the SBA's publications and information products is available in one place, together with

information on public access. The Specifics: A Look at Some SBA

Publications What is happening right now with some key SBA publications? Here is a look at the present

state of a few titles, to better highlight some

trends in the SBA's approaches to document

production and dissemination. The State of Small Business: A Report of the

President The State of Small Business (ISSN 0735-1437)

is an annual economic report on small business that is written by economists and

statisticians in the SBA's Office of Advocacy. It has been, and will continue to be for the 57
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

immediate future, a print product. Some of the data contained in the some 50 tables that make

up the appendices of the book are making

their way to the SBA's Web site.

Small Business Profiles

Small Business Profiles (ISSN 1066-646X) is a collection of basic business statistics organized on a state-by-state basis. With the 1996

edition, it hasiDeen discontinued as a print product. Instead, it has been posted to the SBA's Web site at < http://www.sbaonline.sba.gov/ADVO/stats/

1 996/> as an ASCII text file. Budget and staff cutbacks make it unlikely that this publication

will return as a print product. Opinion Digest A collection of digests of legal opinions. Opinion Digest (ISSN 1092-2628) for many

years was printed by the Government Printing Office (GPO) and sold by the Superintendent

of Documents. When the Opinion Digest was

dropped from the GPO sales program in 1995,

the SBA was faced with a dilemma as to how

best to distribute it. Since the back file (dating

to the agency's beginnings in 1 953) was not

available in digital form, a decision was made

to make the entire collection, along with a comprehensive index (five volumes containing 153 issues), available on microfiche through

the National Technical Information Sen/ice. Future issues will be made available to the public through NTIS, be distributed to depository libraries (even if they are duplicated in-house instead of being printed), and may

eventually be posted as text files to the SBA's Website. SBA Annual Report The most recently issued edition of the SBA's Annual Report (ISSN 0083-3274), covering

fiscal year 1994, was reproduced in-house on

a Xerox Docutech system, instead of being

sent through GPO for printing. This brought

savings for the SBA, but left the two-volume

report a likely fugitive document, since initially no plans were made to provide the Federal

Depository Library Program with copies, and

public dissemination was minimal. In an effort to avoid this situation, copies of the Annual

Report were provided to the Superintendent of Documents for dissemination to the depository

libraries and to the National Technical

Information Service, for public availability and

as an archival, "print-on-demand" resource. Future issues of this document will probably be handled in a similar manner.

Small Business Lending in the United States

In certain ways, a three-year-old publication of the SBA, entitled Small Business Lending in the United States, points the way toward how

certain kinds of technical information,

particularly statistical information, will be

distributed by the SBA in the future. The

primary medium of this study of bank lending

to small businesses is via the agency's Web site at <http://www.sba.gov/ADVO/stats/>. A

print version was given limited distribution, as well as a diskette version. Both versions are made available to the public by the National Technical Information Service. What the Future Holds for SBA Publishing

Unfortunately, a clear path for publishing SBA

materials is not evident today: there is no

single medium that could possibly satisfy the universe of users that a printed product, such

as a book, does so well. As can be readily noted from the narrative above, the SBA's publication effort dips its toes

in a variety of formats: from traditional print, to short-run xerographic processes, to html

postings on Web sites, to Adobe Acrobat (PDF) documents, to microfiche. None of these options is an ideal format for all audiences, but some formats are perfectly suited to the

specialized audiences they attempt to reach.

For the near-term future, there are a number of publication trends that can be identified. There will likely be:

• Continued, though sometimes limited,

print availability of major SBA titles; 58
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

• Growing electronic availability, especially via the Internet, of SBA

publications and resources (though not, as yet, in any consistent format, whether html, ASCII text, PDF, etc.);

• Selected availability to the public of

print products for sale, subject to the decisions of GPO's sales program; and

• Continued availability of the SBA's back file of major documents through

NTIS. Government document librarians will probably have mixed feelings about the scenario presented in this update. The competing demands of a technologically sophisticated public for fast dissemination, of pinched

budgets for cheap solutions, and archivists and

librarians for durable, accessible information make an ideal solution difficult. Because technological change has come so fast to technical publishing as practiced by the Federal Government, it is not only difficult to keep abreast of current developments, but almost impossible to judge which medium,

which technology, and which software standard will ultimately prove to be the wisest choice. Unfortunately, the hindsight we will have gained some twenty or so years from now

will be the only way we can obtain an answer

to this publishing dilemma.

1 . This group of documents is listed in SBA

form 115C, Resource Directory for Small Business Management. The text of the

directory is also posted to the agency's Web site at: http://www.sbaonline.sba.gov/gopher/

Business-Development/resource.txt

59
Proceedings - 1 997 Federal Depository Conference

Patent Products on CD-ROM

David L. Morrison

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Washington, DC

The United States patent database is the largest cross-referenced body of technical information

in the world, with more than six million US

patents granted as of April, 1997. As part of the examination process these patents are assigned to one or more of more than 144,000

classification numbers, which groups that invention with all others containing similar technical features. The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) publishes electronic information on CD-ROM in the Cassis series, which is now

available for selection by Federal depository

libraries through the Government Printing Office (GPO). The Cassis series includes the following patents CD-ROMs:

Patents BIB: Selected Bibliographic Information from US Patents Issued 1969

to Present

Patents CLASS: Current Classifications of US Patents Issued 1 790 to Present

Patents ASSIGN: US Patent Assignments Recorded at the USPTO August 1980 to Present

Patents ASSIST: Full Text of Patent Search Tools

Patents SNAP: Serial Numbers for Allowed

(Granted) Patents and the following trademark CD-ROMs:

Trademarks REGISTERED: Bibliographic Information from Active, Registered Trademarks

Trademarks PENDING: Bibliographic Information from Pending US Trademarks

Trademarks ASSIGN: US Trademark

Assignments Recorded at the USPTO 1955

to Present Trademarks ASSIST: Full Text of Trademark

Search Tools

Federal depository libraries may also select the

Cassis USAPat series, which contains facsimile images of US patents from 1994 to the present. An "image" is an actual page of the patent, including all drawings, and looks just like the

original printed document. USAPat is a document delivery system, not a search

system. Retrieval is only by patent number.

General Cautions: Each Cassis disc must be installed before being

used for the first time; use PTDL installation defaults. Be aware of the scope of your database and

the limitations of your search. Encourage your

patrons to supplement their Cassis searches

with those in other online or Web-based

databases, such as the first-page database

accessible from the USPTO home page < http://www.uspto.gov >

.

To do a serious patent search means searching

by classification numbers after checking the Manual of Classification and the Classification Definitions on CD-ROM or in paper format. A

keyword search can never be exhaustive, because there is no controlled vocabulary.

60
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

Be careful when searching by company names:

official company names are often different from their popular name, and the USPTO does

not standardize them upon entry into its database.

For further training on these products, it is strongly suggested that depository librarians contact their closest Patent and Trademark

Depository Library (PTDL). Each PTDL has an

official librarian liaison to the PTDL Program

Office who has been trained through annual programs at the USPTO, and would be able to help address your needs. You can obtain a current list of PTDLs directly from the USPTO

home page <http://www.uspto.gov>.

For technical questions regarding the use of USPTO's Cassis series or USAPat, please call (703) 306-2600. This number will not answer

search strategy questions nor provide subject matter instruction. It is only for technical support on the use of CD-ROM products.

Library patrons may use the USPTO's

automated message system at (800) PTO-9199

to obtain general information on the most

frequently asked questions about patents and

trademarks, seven days a week, 24 hours a day. Callers may also request a number of USPTO publications by leaving their name and

address on the message system.

Dave Morrison came to the Patent and Trademark Depository Library Program

(PTDLP) office as the thirteenth Patent Fellowship Librarian in October 1996. Dave

has been documents librarian and patents and

trademarks specialist in the Marriott Library at the University of Utah since January 1987.

61
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

Tell Someone Who Cares: Creating Opportunities

to Inform the World (Outside of Libraries)

About Government Documents

Robert A. Hinton

Indiana University - Purdue University at Indianapolis (lUPUl)

Indianapolis, IN

Good afternoon. The setup of the room has changed a bit since I came in earlier (there were tables instead of the rows of chairs as we

have now), so it is going to take me a few

minutes to rearrange how we are going to operate. While I do, I'd suggest that you turn

to your left, introduce yourself, then turn to your right and introduce yourself. It is important that you do this because you are going to be working together this afternoon. When I woke up this morning several occurrences led me to the realization that this was not going to be the best of all possible time slots. First, my Left-Hander's Desk

Calendar quote for today told me that "According to Islamic belief, everyone is given

a book with the record of his or her life. If the book is placed in your right hand, you are blessed; if the book is placed in your left hand, you are damned." Being a natural born lefty, my immediate reaction was, "Damn." Next, I realized that today is the anniversary of the sinking of the Titanic. "Damn." It's tax day. "Damn." My time slot is after lunch, and those

of you who aren't beginning to get drowsy

from lunch are starting to mentally make

dinner plans. And on top of all of that, I'm

getting a year older in three days. I have to remember to thank Sheila for this "damned"

time slot. The title of this session is "Tell Someone Who

Cares: Creating Opportunities to Tell the World (Outside of Libraries) About Government Documents."

Some of you are probably wondering why you

should be here listening to Bob talk about this topic. You don't recall my having any

notoriety for being the leading documents

evangelist, the literature isn't flooded with Bob

articles, and you have probably done as much

or more than I have in the way of promoting Government documents. Why are you sitting there listening to me? One big reason is: I asked for it and you didn't. When I received

the Administrative Notes issue that had the depository conference schedule listed in it, I noticed several sessions "TBA," "TBA," "TBA,"

"TBA." My first thought was that this person TBA was damned prolific. But being curious I called Sheila McGarr and asked her what was

going on with those slots. Sheila informed me

that they all had someone tentatively assigned, but not confirmed yet, and someone might

drop out. I took this as an opportunity, pitched

my idea at Sheila, she thought the idea had

merit and fit with the conference theme. I asked to be considered as designated hitter if someone did drop out. Someone did drop

out. Sheila sent me e-mail stating that I was now "in the batter's box," here I am and there you are. And we have our first example of creating an opportunity instead of waiting for it to fall into your lap. Instead of reading TBA as

"to be announced" read it as "To Be Asked

(For)." As I mentioned earlier, I am not an expert on

this topic, but I was interested enough in it, and willing to go out and do some

reconnoitering for you. I am bringing in experiences I've had, results of an informal

62
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

survey, and news of what our colleagues are doing. I am not the expert, but collectively we

are, and that is what we are going to discover

together today.

Part of what we are talking about is changing your mind-set. I need two volunteers. If the two of you would stand? This is the type of mind set we need to encourage. They didn't know what I was going to ask of them, had no

idea what was coming, but were willing to take a chance. To try something different. To

take a risk. Would everyone please give our

volunteers a hand to thank them. There is an expression you may be familiar with, one used to indicate an inordinate degree of difficulty or impossibility of some

activity. It begins "It would take an act of Congress to..." If you would open the envelopes I distributed to some of you, you

will find slip laws that we documents librarians are all familiar with: acts of Congress. We

realize that an act of Congress isn't that

difficult to come by. Neither is it impossible to create opportunities to speak or publish outside of library land. On the Post-it notes I distributed I want

everyone to write down a reason you can't or haven't spoken to disciplines outside of

librarianship or tried to publish in the literature of disciplines outside of librarianship. As you

finish and I move among you, I want you to crumple the note, and throw it into my bag. You now no longer have that as an excuse to hold you back. It is a mind set you have left behind. Together we are going to realize how to create/take advantage of opportunities to speak and publish outside of librarianship. I am

going to provide seed examples of what I and

others have done, and in groups we are going

to raise a crop of ideas.

I have informally surveyed faculty and

administrators in various disciplines. The first question I asked them was if librarians had

ever given presentations at the conferences

they attend, or published in the literature of

their field. Overwhelmingly the answer was

no. The next question I asked was, "What

would your response or that of your colleagues be to librarians who spoke at your conferences

or published in your literature?" The response

this time was that there would not be a problem, and librarians would be welcomed if:

1 . there were clear indications of how the information presented would affect them

(how they do research, when they do

research, where they do research);

2. the talk/article were relevant to the field (or focus of the conference);

3. the information/topic was timely;

4. the information/topic engendered new

approaches, and

5. they were shown what they have to gain by attending the session, or reading the

article. Other comments were that librarian presentations would be more appropriate at the larger conferences with multiple topic

areas - the smaller conferences tend to be more

focused or work-oriented. Also that the approach or attitude taken needs to be not "I know more than you," but "Here is how I can

help you," "This is what is happening in my

field that can impact yours," "You may not be aware of..."

Admittedly this was a small sample, and not a

scientific survey. But it is encouraging, and

points to an opportunity for someone out there

(this is a hint, people) to do the formal,

scientific survey and write the paper, and make

the presentation both within and without the

library world.

In the past year I have made several presentations on Government documents to diverse groups:

63
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

For the Indiana Teachers of Writing conference

I collaborated with an English faculty member

on a presentation called "A Federal Case: Using Government Documents to Teach

Research Writing." The faculty member (Dr. Nadene A. Keene, Indiana University Kokomo)

was faced with writing textbooks that had skimpy information on Government

documents (if they had any information on Government documents at all), sometimes

incorrect information on Government

documents, and students with the perennial excuse "I can't find any information on my

topic." Dr. Keene outlined the problems,

presented her syllabus and the topics chosen by the students. I described the Federal Depository Library Program, explained some

of the access tools to Government documents, and showed how Government documents had

quality resources (acceptable by the faculty member) for every topic chosen by the

students. Through my work as liaison to the School of Public and Environmental Affairs I discovered from a faculty member (Dr. Robert Lehnen,

lUPUl) that members of an association he belonged to, the American Statistical Association, a) were not familiar with the depository program and b) had an upcoming

Joint Statistical Meeting conference with a special session on Electronic Dissemination of

Statistical Information. I took advantage of the

"insider" information and submitted a proposal, "Electronic Dissemination of Government Information: GPO and the Federal Depository Program in Transition," and made the opportunity to inform an

international audience of statisticians about the FDLP, the transition to electronic distribution of Federal statistical information, and

implications for statisticians. FOIIndiana is a group of journalists, citizens and citizen action groups in Indiana. For the

30"" anniversary of the Freedom of Information Act they sponsored a "Your Right to Know"

conference. I participated on their "Records and Cyberspace" panel, talking about and

demonstrating Government information in electronic format that is available to citizens.

Other examples of the creative approaches documents librarians are taking:

• In Arizona: Docs Tour '97 (Some Things in Life are Free: Accessing Federal Government Information) is a program to help raise awareness regarding the knowledge and use of Federal depository

information in libraries across Arizona. The Tour begins in February and ends in September, covering six cities (Yuma,

Glendale, Tucson, Kingman, Flagstaff, and Apache Junction). The workshops are aimed at increasing awareness of existing Federal print and electronic resources,

identifying and accessing Federal Government information sources, and

locating information in the Federal depository libraries in Arizona. Librarians and educators knowledgeable in the area

of Federal documents are teaming up to prepare and present these workshops. And

just like a rock tour, they have produced

tour t-shirts, which are being worn by a contingent from Arizona here in the front row.

• Anna Sylvan in Missouri attends meetings

of the local chambers of commerce,

business organizations, informing them

about Government documents and making

networking connections. She also conducts regularly scheduled bibliographic

instruction sessions for the public, and announces them in the local newspaper.

• Tom Lindsey, University of Texas at Arlington, sends information about new

Government documents of interest to local groups, such as documents on lowering

cholesterol levels, and breast cancer to

local jazzercise instructors.

• As Dawn Hammel, Creighton University

puts it, "Sometimes you have to be sneaky

when promoting documents." She ties documents to the curriculum, billing classes as "Political Science Resources on

the Web" and "Economics Resources on

the Web," garnering much better response

64
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

than when the class was listed as "Government Documents."

• Mary Frellich, University of Memphis,

delivered a paper on using Web

documents in the chemistry classroom to the American Chemical Society entitled "Freebies from the Feds."

• Beth Baur, University of Memphis, has

targeted teacher groups during their inservice programs. She contacts them and

offers them a different type of program idea than they normally have and has had great response. She has also addressed the Music Catalogers OCLC Users Group.

After she had an article published in JGI, she was approached by Bowker-Saur to contribute a chapter to their new music

information series. Establishing a track record, and getting your name out there can lead to other opportunities.

• Grace York, University of Michigan, has spoken extensively in the statistical community, partly because of her

participation in the State Data Center Program: Inter-University Consortium for

Political and Social Research, summer

conferences, 1980, 1991, 1992. Southeast Michigan Census Council on Internet resources of statistics. Association of Public Data Users on how the Federal Government's move to electronics was

affecting depositories. And she got New

York Times coverage of her Congressional

e-mail list.

• Eleanor Chase, University of Washington,

advocates city manager, mayor, and

attorney general conferences as targets of opportunity as well as local geographic

information systems personnel.

• David Heisser wrote a report on efforts in New England to promote documents: David C. R. Heisser, Marketing U.S. Depository Libraries: Preliminary Report on a Public Awareness Campaign in New

England," Government Publications Review 13 (1986): 55-65.

As you can see there are many different ways

your colleagues are using to create opportunities to speak and publish outside

library circles. Now it is time for the group work I promised

you. For the first few rows on this side of the room (group one) I have copies of calls for papers from the Chronicle of Higher Education Web site <http://www.chronicle.merit.edu/

events/edead.html >, and a call for proposals

for the Conference on College Composition and Communication. Your task is to identify as many ways as you can where Government

documents and the Federal Depository Library Program can have an impact or would be

appropriate for these publications or conferences. Group two: here are copies of the chapters from the english textbooks I mentioned earlier that have poor or inaccurate information on Government documents. Your job is to

identify the incorrect information, and decide how the sections on Government documents

could be improved. Second, what ideas do

you have for updating the information and how would you approach the publishers to get the material corrected and updated? The third group is tasked with identifying people resources (state, local, national, or

international) who could benefit from knowing

about Government documents and the Federal Depository Library Program. And last but not least group four. What

organizations can you identify (state, local, national, or international) who could benefit from knowing about Government documents

and the Federal Depository Library Program? When working also think about what

approaches or tactics you would use to state your case to these organizations or people.

All of the groups have fifteen minutes to work

together. Then a spokesperson will report back to the group and we will put your

responses up on the walls.

65
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

While you are working I'd like to share with you a fantasy I had in the shower this morning.

It occurred to me that we are in the middle of National Library Week. Seven days when

(theoretically) the nation is focused on libraries and library issues. And it hit me, Why isn't there a Depository Day? Can you imagine

Sheila McGarr approaching ALA and asking for a Depository Day? "We aren't greedy. As

depository librarians we are used to doing more with less. We just want '24 little hours,' and we can show what a difference Depository

Day can make." The results of the groups, and the information I presented earlier about what I and our

colleagues have been doing proves that there

are multiple opportunities to inform the world

outside of library land about Government

documents.

As group one reported, not one of the calls for presenters or calls for papers specifically mentioned libraries. Government documents,

or the Federal Depository Library Program, but we were able to find in almost every instance, an opportunity for documents librarians to have an impact. We need to seek out the

calls, read them, analyze them and employ the same critical thinking skills we tell patrons to use. And it is up to us to approach the issuers of the calls because they don't have us in mind when they put out the calls. There are professional and academic

associations that we can approach for presentations or publications: find out where

and when they issue calls for participation. (Check conference proceedings, newsletters,

journals, the Chronicle of Higher Education,

talk to members of associations.)

opportunities to inform the world (outside of

libraries) about Government documents.

James Brown, the Godfather of Soul, the hardest working man in show business, once

sang, "I don't want nobody giving me nothing. Open up the door, I'll get it myself." Documents librarians are the hardest working

librarians in library land. Today, together, we

have opened up the door to informing the world outside of libraries about Government

documents. Now go get it yourself.

There are textbooks with out-of-date, inaccurate or lacking information on Government documents.

There are individuals and organizations to network with. As we have discovered together today, with

initiative and creativity we can create 66
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

"Federal Information Center, How May I Help

You?'' Or, "People Serving People"

Warren Snaider

General Services Administration Washington, DC

1 . Let's start with what the Federal Information Center (FIC) is and why it was

founded. The first FIC work site was set up In Atlanta in

1 966 - that's over 30 years ago. The concept was simple: The FIC would be a traffic cop to

assist callers to get to the right part of the right agency after just one call. This function would

eliminate the public's having to call multiple

offices and would allow agencies to handle

only the calls they should receive. The

program expanded over the years and now

responds to about 2 million calls a year placed

to a nationwide toll-free number, (800) 688-9889. The FIC is open from 9:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., eastern time, for live assistance. Recorded messages on frequently asked

questions are available at all times. The FIC responds to public inquiries about

Federal agencies, program, and services. That sounds simple. Until you realize the breadth and depth of information required to respond

to inquiries that may include:

• flood relief for a North Dakota urban

dweller this month;

• disaster assistance for a North Dakota

rancher who lost livestock during a

blizzard last month;

• a no-charge telephone number for passport information (they do exist);

• which copyright form is used to protect a song (several possibilities);

• who to see about food stamps;

• how to obtain a replacement for a lost savings bond;

• how to complain about worker safety

issues;

• how to get a job with the Federal Government, and

• a subject near and dear to our hearts: how

to obtain a Government document.

This is of course just the smallest range I can

mention. The real questions include, as any

librarian knows, any imaginable subject.

2. So how does the staff go about trying to respond to all of these issues? One major way

is to have a computerized data base with more than 100,000 points of contacts, with Government fact sheets, with the complete

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance, and

with other information about Federal programs. The data base, up to now, has been

designed for internal use only. For the past

little while we have been working with the Government Printing Office (GPO) to transfer

this relational data base onto a CD-ROM. The

disc will then be sent to the Government

depository libraries and will be sold to the public through GPO's sales program. We

have tested the disc at some local libraries (college and Government) and are about to receive what we hope will be the first version

to be distributed. We want to update the public data base every quarter. (The live data base is updated daily.)

67
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

And there's more. We are also working with our sister program, the Government

Information Xchange, to see about placing the

FIC's data base on their Web site, <http://www.info.gov>. The FIC already

refers Web users to specific sites or to the general search tool; the Web site will now

refer Web users to a live person if they need

assistance or information they can't obtain through their own search.

3. "So," you ask, "why have I never heard of you?" The principal way that callers find out about the FIC is through local telephone

directories. We list the number in nearly 400

large-city directories (at least one in each State)

all across the U.S. Is the FIC a well-kept secret

in spite of that? Yes, it is. "Why is that?", you

ask. Until funding allows for the call volume

to increase, we have to place a cap on the number of calls. So we rely on other information professionals and on other Government offices to let more people know

about us and expand the workload slowly. To

that end, there are brochures and Rolodex®

cards available for you to take back to your

library and more are available by letting the FIC or me know.

By the way, nearly two thirds of our calls currently come from the States of California,

Florida, Illinois, New York, and Texas. About two fifths of the calls come from the regional

dialing areas of Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas, Houston, Los Angeles, Miami, New York, San

Diego, San Francisco, and Tampa.

4. Let's also discuss some minutia and other

tidbits for those who need or want to know

such things:

• The average cost for a call is about $1 .50.

• The FIC's budget is about $3.3 million and

the major expenses are personnel and

telecommunications.

• The FIC employs about 80 staff-years.

• The FIC has distributed copyright forms

since 1975 and now distributes more forms

to individuals than the Copyright Office does.

• We are working with the Consumer

Information Center to distribute their catalog more readily by having set up a separate toll-free '888' number for catalog

calls.

• The FIC is the principal source of information on Federal per diem rates because of an agreement with another part of GSA.

• We also have an agreement with the U.S. Marshals Service and the Consumer

Information Center to provide information on the Marshals program to sell property

seized by Federal law enforcement

agencies.

• Callers who speak only Spanish are directed to Spanish-speaking staff. Other

languages are dealt with on an ad hoc

basis.

5. Now, about Government documents

specifically. What we try to do in the FIC is avoid a knee-jerk referral to a sales program, even though some documents are available only through GPO or NTIS. But some are

available from the publishing agency for free.

It certainly can't hurt to verify which approach

is more valid in a specific case. If the real question is the use of the document, we also consider it fair to refer a caller to a library if we

have verified that the document is available for public use at that library.

6. At this point, let me summarize what I think

is the key point about the FIC: We offer people

a chance to talk to real, live people about their inquiry. Yes, we have a choice of recordings

that a caller must wend through. Yes, we are working to make information about the Government available to the public in other media like the Internet. But we know that some people are going to be confused no

matter what we do. And others will have

questions about new or changed programs that cannot be answered in a database that was

68
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

written before yesterday. We, like the public

libraries, are a place for people to contact people who will help them with their concerns.

69
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference NASA Information for Government Depository

Users

Dr. Roger D. Launius

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Wasliington, DC

Overview

• NASA's Mandate of Information Dissemination :

• Ongoing Publications Program

• New Information Technologies as Supplements NASA's Mandate of Information Dissemination

• Space Act calls for NASA to "provide for the widest practicable and appropriate dissemination of information concerning its activities and the results thereof"

• NASA strives for openness

proactive approach no undue security regulations

• NASA employees have wide latitude to choose appropriate methods NASA Publications Program

• Ongoing since agency founding

• Various formats

Special Publications Technical Reports Contractor Reports

Periodicals Monographs

• History publications are just one large component

Where to Find NASA Publications

• NASA Information Center

• NASA Printing Officer

• NASA Center for Aerospace Information

(CASI)

• History Office

• Public Affairs Office NASA's Use of New Information Technologies

• Electronic media supplement, not replace, printed word (OMB directive)

• Advantages

Speed - updating, viewing

Relatively cheap and easy to produce

Many people outside NASA have

access

• Caveats

Equal access for all? Accountability

Variety of NASA Electronic Information

• World Wide Web

History Spacelink (Educational Resource) Center for Aerospace Information

(CASI) Headquarters, field centers Public affairs

70
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

Spaceflight, aeronautics More NASA Electronic Media

• CD-ROM's

• E-mail listservs

Press Releases

Shuttle History

• OtherNASA TV

Videos

Summary

• NASA takes information dissemination

very seriously

• Conventional publication program

continues strongly

• NASA is also a leader in new electronic forms

71
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference National Criminal justice Reference Service

Anne Hudson Bolin

National Criminal justice Reference Service

Roclcville, MD

Hi, I'm Anne Bolin with the National Criminal

Justice Reference Senv'ice, or NCJRS. I wanted

to begin with a couple of statistics that came

out recently that really struck me. What would you say are the chances that an American will go to prison during their lifetime? How about a 1 in 20 chance? That's according to a report we published last month

that looked at several factors and extrapolated

the lifetime likelihood of going to State or Federal prison. 5% of all people, or 1 % of women and 9% of men, will go to prison during their lifetimes if the 1991 incarceration

rate remains the same. Is that scary?

But how about another recently-published

report, which we can see as positive if not still a little alarming. Since the Brady bill was

enacted, each month an average of 6,600

firearms purchases were prevented by

background checks of potential gun buyers. Over 70% of those people were rejected because they were already felons. That's 6,600 gun purchases per month prevented due

to the Brady act-which may be scary, but which shows that Federal actions really can make a difference in the landscape of crime in this country.

I start with those two reports to give you an

idea of the kind of information that is coming

out of NCJRS. We distribute a huge amount of information each year, and I hope that this presentation will give you an idea of what

kinds of services we can provide to you and

your patrons. Background

Congress recognized the need to collect criminal justice information in a central

location, and directed the National Institute of

Justice (NIJ), which is the research and development agency of the U.S. Department

of Justice, to "serve as a national and

international clearinghouse for the exchange of information" in criminal justice. So in 1972,

NIJ established its clearinghouse, the National Criminal Justice Reference Service, or NCJRS. NCJRS has grown to serve all the agencies of the Office of Justice Programs within the U.S. Department of Justice. So NCJRS is actually an umbrella clearinghouse for several clearinghouses serving the Department of

Justice and the White House's Office of National Drug Control Policy.

For the Office of Juvenile Justice and

Delinquency Prevention, orOJJDP, NCJRS

provides information and services to juvenile

justice professionals and policy makers, produces and distributes the agency's

publications, and prepares customized

responses to information requests.

For the Office for Victims of Crime, or OVC,

NCJRS responds to requests from crime

victims, victim services agencies, and

researchers for victim-related information. Topics addressed include child physical and

sexual abuse, victim services, domestic

violence, victim-witness programs, and violent crime.

For the Bureau of Justice Statistics, or BJS, NCJRS aims to provide easy access to crime and justice data. In addition to distributing BJS

publications, the clearinghouse responds to

statistics requests by quoting statistics over the phone and offering document data base

searches, statistics information packages,

referrals, and other related services.
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

For the Bureau of Justice Assistance, or B.A., NCJRS provides State and local criminal justice professionals with reference and referral services, distributes publications, and

participates in conferences and other outreach

activities. B.A.'s mission is to support

innovative criminal justice programs through

funding, technical assistance, training, and

information dissemination. NCJRS also includes the White House's Office

of National Drug Control Policy, also known

as the "Drug Czar's" office. NCJRS gathers and

disseminates information on drug policy and

the intersection of drugs and crime, placing

special emphasis on serving the information needs of local and State criminal justice and

health policy makers and practitioners. Information Collection and Dissemination So what kinds of information is NCJRS

collecting and disseminating? This gives you

an idea of the basic subject matter we are dealing with:

• Law enforcement (e.g., community

policing, effective policing strategies)

• Courts (e.g., managing the huge caseload now before our courts)

• Corrections (e.g., providing health care to inmates, especially HIV-positive inmates)

• Juvenile Justice (e.g., programs to prevent

juvenile delinquency)

• Victims (e.g., rights of the victim)

• Drugs and Crime (e.g., how drug use

affects other crimes)

• Violence

• Criminal Justice

• Technologies (e.g., smart guns and less than lethal technologies)

We cover these subjects by collecting and

distributing:

• Research, and evaluations of research and

programs

• Program descriptions

• Statistics, and

• Funding Opportunities NCJRS focuses on serving professionals in the

criminal justice field, including Federal, State and local policy makers, criminal justice researchers including academia, law enforcement officers, court personnel, prison and jail personnel, juvenile delinquency

workers, victims rights advocates, public

health officials, the media, and of course

librarians, who serve all of these groups. NCJRS sends out hundreds of new publications every year; in fact about 4 million paper documents go out of our warehouse each year. Of course, depository libraries receive almost

all of this material via GPO.

I'm very glad to report that 95% of this new

printed material is also going up on our Web

site in full text as it is distributed in print. NCJRS has no plans to discontinue printing documents, but we do find ourselves reaching more people who can use our information by

putting it online, and we love the ability for users to gain such quick access to the full text of documents by going to them directly online. We'll look at the NCJRS Web site in just a couple of moments. NCJRS Document Data Base

But first let me talk about the NCJRS Document Data Base, which many of your

libraries probably own on CD-ROM. In fact, when this audience hears the word "NCJRS" you may only think of the CD-ROM.

The NCJRS Document Data Base is a bibliographic database of abstracts for criminal

justice literature. 73
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

This slide shows the subjects we collect on and how they are distributed statistically. As you can see, our big emphases are law enforcement and courts, with corrections and

statistics also big. Juvenile justice is also a very important area that has been growing recently. NCJRS collects a variety of materials, including books. Federal Government documents, and

journal articles. NCJRS collects beyond the scope of other

collections, including State and local government reports, NCJRS agency-sponsored

research studies and reports, evaluation

reports, training manuals, speeches, program

descriptions, and international criminal justice publications. We are proud of our collection of materials

that other sources don't collect: what can be

thought of as the grey literature in criminal

justice, like unpublished papers and local government reports. Often when researchers look to see what is really happening in anti-crime efforts, what kinds of programs work

and which don't work, it's that grey literature that comes through with some answers. As many of you know, the CD-ROM is a GPO

depository item. The database is also available on DIALOG as

file 21. The file on DIALOG is updated

monthly. We've been on DIALOG for years and years, and in fact the NCJRS database has

existed as an online-only bibliographic database since the early 1970's.

Let me point out also that we do produce print bibliographies from the database. These are searches of the database on the most popular

topics-like community policing, violent juvenile offenders, or capital punishment-and

are available for sale. We have over 100

topics available in print form. It is also possible to have NCJRS perform a search of the Document Data Base for a charge, and patrons should call NCJRS to ask for such a custom

search.

One thing we're really excited about is that the Document Data Base is going to be coming

onto the Web in the next couple of months; I would estimate in June. We are not sure yet what the accessibility will be, and whether we

will be required to charge access fees or not. I wish I had an answer on that for you today, but

I do not. The Web address on the screen is our basic Web site address, and when the Document Data Base comes on line you can be sure that we'll feature it on the home page.

I will also announce it on GOVDOC-L, for those who subscribe to that listserv.

I am working on the user interface for the Web

product and think it's going to be really user

friendly with some nice features. Let me say

that we encourage feedback from users on our

products and invite you to let us know about

features you like or don't like. The software GPO uses is not infinitely customizable, or sometimes customization comes with a prohibitive cost, so we aren't able to incorporate every enhancement that we would

like-however, the CD-ROM in fact has had some changes made to it over the past few

years in response to comments from depository

librarians. So I assure you that your comments

don't fall on deaf ears. Document Delivery A very important fact about the Document

Data Base is that all of the items abstracted on

it are available for interlibrary loan (ILL) from NCJRS. There is a charge of $4.50 per item for

ILL'S which needs to be prepaid, which you

can do by check, credit card, or deposit account. The address and telephone to initiate a loan are on the screen. Please just send us a standard ALA interlibrary loan form and we

will get the material out to you. Our collection

is not on OCLC, so the ALA forms are the way

to go. Keep in mind also that whenever NCJRS has

copyright clearance, we will make a photocopy of a publication abstracted in the database, so that is another option for document delivery. The charge is $5 per

publication, plus 10 cents per page. 74
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

Whenever NCJRS is able to make photocopies

of a document, the data base record will say in the sale field, "NCJRS paper reproduction

sales." Then just give us a call or mail, fax or

e-mail your request to us. Microfiche Ceased Some of you may be aware that NCJRS went

through a big round of budget cuts, actually taking effect exactly one year ago today. We

lost several staff members and along with them

the microfiche program. So NCJRS is no

longer putting documents on microfiche, but we hope to go to electronic imaging in the not too distant future. For those libraries that have

retrospective collections of NCJRS microfiche, keep in mind that the Document Data Base is the best index to the fiche. About one third of what is on the Document Data Base is available in full text on the fiche, and for each

publication available on the fiche, the SALE

field of the data base record says "NCJRS

microfiche sales," just as it says "paper

reproduction sales" on the screen here. NCJRS Web Site So while we're not producing the microfiche, we are putting lots and lots of full text documents from the Department of Justice online on the Web site. So let me give you a

little tour.

This is the Justice Information Center, or NCJRS' Web site, at <http://www.ncjrs.org>. We've tried to orient the Justice Information Center for someone who is looking for information on a particular topic, because that

is the. way most users come to us. From the

first screen you can choose from any of the main subject areas we cover, like corrections or juvenile justice or law enforcement. For example, let me choose Courts. As I've mentioned, we link to hundreds of full text documents-actual ly more than 700-but

also to lots of other Internet sites related to criminal justice, and we also provide some

information on listservs in the field. From this screen I'll choose documents. We try to provide all publications in two

formats: in plain ASCII text, and in PDF or Adobe Acrobat format. For example

"Assessment... Day Fines" is in ASCII. Next I'll back out of this and go to another

topic area. Let's look at Juvenile Justice. This

is broken down further into topic areas, so let's look at Corrections. "Boot Camp Drug Treatment..." is an example

of a PDF file. This Adobe Acrobat format has

the advantage of retaining all of the graphics, so for example with a publication like this we

are able to view the graphs. The user does need to have the Adobe Acrobat software loaded on their desktop to view these files. The software is free and a link from the home

page shows you how to download it.

I'll go back to the home page. There is a keyword search function here, which

unfortunately I can't demonstrate because I'm not using a live connection. But you can

search on any word appearing anywhere in the

full text of the ASCII publications as well as the html files. The search, which uses the Excite search engine, supports full boolean logic. Below the topic areas is a link to "New This Week," which lists everything we've put up in the last week. You can also click on previous weeks to see what else is new. There's also a

link to Current Highlights, which lists the most

noteworthy new items, and usually things stay up there for about one month.

There is also a link here to lists of conferences

in criminal justice. We plan to make this a searchable database, but for now you can look

at lists of conferences in the field with their dates and contact information. There is also a link to Justice Grants, which as you might imagine is a popular spot. This area

lists all of the funding opportunities coming

out of the NCJRS agencies, and usually gives you the full text of grant solicitations and often 75
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

the application forms needed. Most of these

grants are for criminal justice professionals, be

they academic researchers or practitioners in the field like government workers who deal with juvenile delinquents. There aren't funding opportunities for general college and

university study, because these agencies aren't oriented toward that type of aid. There is also a paragraph explaining NCJRS on

the home page, and links to each of the government agencies which supports NCJRS.

I wanted to point out that one of the NCJRS

agencies, the Bureau of Justice Statistics or BJS,

is about to unveil its new Web site this month. Not many people outside of BJS have seen it yet, so the drama is building up now to see what it will be like-I've heard that it's going to be great.

BJS is very committed to making statistical data

available in a usable electronic form to everyone who can make use of it. For example, when they put the text of one of their publications online, they are also making a live online link to the original data set itself, for researchers to download and manipulate. This

is a great boon to any researchers using

criminal justice statistics. I believe that someone from BJS is going to be speaking here

at the conference tomorrow, and I encourage anyone with an interest in criminal justice or even just in statistics to attend. Then scrolling down below the links to the agencies we have again the Current Highlights. JUSTINFO

After that is a little explanation for JUSTINFO. JUSTINFO, or Justice Information, is an

electronic newsletter we put out twice a month. It comes to subscribers via e-mail, and we use a listserv to maintain the distribution

list. Here is the information on how to subscribe. Send the message "subscribe justinfo your name" to < listproc@ncjrs.org > . Then twice a month you'll get a short summary of all the

new publications we've come out with, along

with a URL for where to find them online and/or information on how to get them in print. We also let people know about grant

opportunities, noteworthy conferences, new

agency initiatives, and things like that. I encourage you to subscribe to JUSTINFO if you work with criminal justice information.

Like I said, it will come to you via e-mail twice

a month, on the 1 st and the 1 5th of the month. Then at the bottom of the home page it lets you know that users can send questions to the

e-mail address < askncjrs@ncjrs.org > . Users can send publication orders for things in print, or ask reference questions. We have recently dedicated a entire full time position just to answering the reference questions we get coming into the askncjrs mailbox.

Since we're at the bottom of the home page let me go a little more into the reference services we offer. Reference Services We answer a large number of telephone

requests: last month we had 7400 telephone

inquiries. We answer a broad range of

inquiries from a broad audience, and again we

aim to focus on criminal justice practitioners in the field and researchers. On the screen is one

of our 800 numbers and the askncjrs e-mail address I just mentioned. I brought a few

hundred Rolodex® cards with this information, so you should be able to get one

of those. You are welcome to use the 800

lines yourself, or to refer patrons directly to us. We have as a first line of defense, as it were, a

staff who answer the 800 lines, and then for the tougher questions, we have people with experience in the field who can call people

back. For example, we have two ex-police

officers, someone who used to work in a

prison, a couple of people who worked in court pretrial services; so we do have people

with substantive knowledge who will try to answer your questions or lead you in the right direction.

76
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

JUVJUST

Here is the address to subscribe to the JUSTINFO newsletter again. I also want to say

that we have another electronic distribution list called JUVJUST, which is just for juvenilerelated information coming out of the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention at the Department of Justice. The list is aimed at criminal justice professionals working with

juveniles or on juvenile-related issues. To

subscribe to that list, send a message to the same address on the screen, but make the body of the message say "subscribe juvjust your name." Key Sources

I wanted to finish today by pointing out a couple of key sources in some of the most

popular criminal justice subjects you may be

having to address in your libraries today.

First, criminal justice statistics. We distribute a

lot more than statistics, but we get so many

statistics-related questions, and I know you do

too, that I wanted to summarize the key

sources for you. The "Uniform Crime Reports" come out of the

FBI and aren't distributed by NCJRS, but

they're a very key source. The Uniform Crime

Reports, which say "Crime in the U.S." on the cover and come out annually, report on crimes

reported to the police. They get pretty detailed

in their coverage of offenses and different areas

of the country. You can also get to the data online at < http://www.fbi.gov/publish.htm > . The "National Criminal Victimization Survey"

is kind of the flipside to the Uniform Crime

Reports. This is an annual survey that calls thousands of people up and asks them if they have been the victim of a violent crime. So

while the Uniform Crime Reports pick up all crimes reported to the police, the Victimization Survey is also going to pick up

crimes NOT reported to the police. That kind

of data can be important for crimes often not

reported, like violence against women. The

address for the Bureau of Justice Statistics,

which puts this out, is <http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs>

.

And finally, the "Sourcebook of Criminal

justice Statistics," which is probably another

dog-eared publication in your library if you get any crime-related questions. This is another

publication of the Bureau of Justice Statistics, and compiles hundreds of charts from their various data collections, on tons of subjects such as prison and jail populations, the costs to governments of prisons and police forces, the

race and sex of victims and perpetrators of crime, and so on. This Sourcebook is available online at <http://www.albany.edu/ sourcebook > . It is also going to be coming

out very, very soon on CD-ROM, and that CD

is probably going to become an important part of your reference collection. Another big topic is drugs and crime. There

are three publications we use constantly to respond to drug-related questions. Pulse Check: National Trends in Drug Abuse is an

interesting publication. To create it, ethnographers go out in the field and actually ask people on the street, "What are you using and how much did you pay for it?" So it is used as a barometer of the types of drugs that are popular on the street, their purity, how

people get them, etc. This used to be quarterly but now comes out twice a year. The National Drug Control Strategy is the centerpiece document for the Drug Czar's

office at the White House. It maps out the Federal Government's strategy for combating

drugs and is constantly referred to in other documents and initiatives. The last thing I'll point out is Drug Use Trends,

a fact sheet which gets a lot of circulation. This is a good reference source also. By the way, all of the publications are available in full text on the NCJRS Web site at <http://www.ncjrs.org>, and are also available in print from us. The last slide I have today is on Juvenile Crime. We get a huge number of questions about this, and in fact information on juveniles 77
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

is the most-accessed part of our Web site. A

couple of key sources we are currently using and distributing are listed here.

State Responses to Serious and Violent

Juvenile Crime is a great resource on how

states are combating violent juvenile crime

problems. It also leads readers to a number of other sources of information.

Juvenile Court Statistics, put out by the Office

of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency

Prevention, is one of the staple statistical sources we distribute. And lastly, there is Combating Violence and

Delinquency: The National Juvenile Justice Action Plan. This came out almost a year ago

already, but we are constantly referring people

to it as an outline of the juvenile crime problem in this country and ways that the

Federal Government is addressing the problem.

Again, each of these is available in print from

us and you may already have them in your

depository collections, and they each are also available online.

78
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

Innovation on the Web: Everything Old Is New

Again

Saundra Williams

The University of Memphis

Memphis, TN

The topic given this panel, Government Documents Librarians' Innovation on the Web,

appears to me to be old-fashioned

librarianship. We are learning how to exercise our traditional roles and formal training in a world for which we had no preparation. On

the Web we are identifying, evaluating and

describing, organizing information and linking the public to the best sources. We are doing

the traditional things we have done in our own

libraries for years only now with a national audience.

It shouldn't come as a surprise that Government publications librarians are taking advantage of the Web in a collaborative way. We have always felt a cohesiveness that I don't believe many other librarian specialists feel. In the grand scheme, we are but a small band who love what we do and have sometimes felt a little alone. The Web has brought us even

closer together because of this opportunity to share our resources and talents. When one

library in the field can do something valuable, maybe even tedious, the other almost 1400

depository libraries don't have to do it! Collaborating and dividing labor is a great opportunity for us.

I am going to visit a few Web sites which

illustrate innovative uses of new technology in the broad areas of traditional librarianship. If I had time to show all my favorite sites and give

credit everywhere it is due, we would be here

a long time, because many people and

libraries are doing truly fine things on the Web. But I had to choose and limit, so here

are the selected resources.

Traditional Librarian Roles

Identify Evaluate Organize

Present to Public Collaborate

"\ am well aware that the reader does not

require information, but I, on the other had,

feel impelled to give it to him." /ean Jacques

Rousseau, Les Confessions

I love this quote because it expresses my

feeling about what librarians do and leads so

well into the first topic, creating resource

guides. Resource Guides

• Provide Instruction

• Identify, Evaluate and Describe Sites

• Organize and Annotate Class Guides

• Provide Broad Subject Access

Provide Instruction Guide to Thomas - Larry Schankman,

Mansfield University http://www.clark.net/pub/lschankAA/eb/ mythomas.html

It's fitting to begin with a guide from one of the

best and first documents librarians on the Web.

Larry Schankman's Guide to Thomas provides

logical steps and divisions for finding

79
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

information using Thomas. He explains

processes, terms, how to cite, and so on, all in one complete guide.

Identify, Evaluate and Describe Sites

U.S. Courts - The University of Memphis

http://www.lib.memphis.edu/gpo/unclesam. htm

Since I have to be on this panel and you don't,

I get to show my own site. Don't worry, I limited myself to two! I like annotated guides.

I want a description of the site, dates included and other pertinent information before I go

there. I only have so much room in my head,

so I need reminders. , Organize and Annotate Class Guides

Class Guides - Stephen Patrick, East Tennessee

State University http://www.ETSU-TN.EDU/library/demo

Stephen has about 20 class guides up with more to come. He has an art background and

is responsible for the law library and Government documents, so you see quite a

variety of guides here. He collaborated with

the professors on all these. Students must use

these guides in fulfilling their assignment. This

is great publicity for librarian guides as they get students used to looking at libraries' Web

pages for more efficient information gathering. Broad Subject Access

U.S. Resources - Peggy Jobe, University of Colorado, Boulder

http://www-libraries.colorado.edu/ps/ gov/us/Federal.htm Numerous libraries have chosen to arrange

their pages by broad subject access. At the University of Colorado, Boulder, Peggy has chosen to provide subject access and has added value by briefly annotating the links.

Subject Areas - Barbara Whitener, University of

Louisville

http://www.louisville.edu/groups/library-www/

ekstrom/govpubs Another library using subject areas is the University of Louisville. A lengthy and well done subject arrangement here is done by

Barbara Whitener. It is so up-to-date it has a very timely guide for floods.

Professional Expertise and Personality

Professional Expertise

Creativity Personal Interests Some pages reflect the professionalism,

personality and creativity of the individual

librarian or librarians.

U.S. Depository Ready Reference Sources at Columbia University http://www.cc.columbia.edu/cu/libraries/indiv/

dsc/readyref.html

Several libraries have developed electronic reference shelves patterned after our traditional ones but including both print and electronic documents. This one at Columbia shows

imagination, professional expertise and

ambition. The list indicates if the titles are in print, CD-ROM, electronic or all three, gives the format on the Web and a Columbia crown

indicates licensed databases available only

locally.

Creativity

Putting Digital Docs to Work - Paul Lewis,

University of South Carolina, Aiken

http://library.usca.sc.edu/library/docs/govdocs. htm

Paul Lewis advertises the practical use people

can make of Government publications,

particularly CD's. He used his creative ability and mapping expertise to develop the unusual.

His site has a variety of local maps which he

developed. This site makes me want to run to the Geography Department for an intern with GIS experience!
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

Personal Interests Resources of Use to Government Documents

Librarians - Andrea Sevetson, UC Berkeley http://www.library.berkeley.edu/GODORT As Chair of GODORT, Andrea's

responsibilities and interests led her to construct this highly valuable site for documents librarians. This is the place to go

for current Government/GPO policy and

happenings, for GODORT information and many items of professional interest. Collaboration Share the Labor

Build Partnerships Grants

Several types of collaboration are going on. One of the ways we documents librarians collaborate is to divide the labor. Share the Labor

Migrating Government Publications - The

University of Memphis

http://www.lib.memphis.edu/gpo/mig.htm

I consider Migrating Government Publications

a "share the labor" kind of creation. Thinking

traditionally, I was going to attempt to mark

our shelf list when a publication went

electronic. (You have to remember this was in the dark ages before catalog records had the

possibility of URLs, in 1 995). But since I was

sure several several hundred other people were trying to get a handle on this too, eureka, why not use the Web? That was the beginning

of Migrating Government Publications, found

here in Superintendent of Documents and title order.

U.S. Government CD-ROMs - Larry Schankman, Mansfield University http://www.clark.net/pub/lschankWeb/gpoed.html We are sometimes asked for a list of the CD's we have. I don't have to make the list because

Larry Schankman did, and will update it periodically. Other libraries are providing CD

information in other ways. The University of

Virginia is working on a searchable list. Robert

Lopresti's DocBase CD-ROM guides are

available at the University of Minnesota,

Duluth. Depository Management

Basic Depository Library Documents - Tom

Tyler, University of Denver

http://www.du.ed u/"ttyler/bd ldhome.htm Under the topic depository technical management, great resources have appeared to make depository processing and office management easier. One of the persons

responsible for a management project is on

this panel. Tom has an enhanced Superseded

List, the List of Classes, List of Depository

Libraries, in all some twenty basic depository documents. In a presentation here on Monday, Tom said we could "share the grief and effort of the nitty-gritty of processing." Here is a fine example.

Item Lister - Government Printing Office http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/dpos/

fdlppro.html We used GPO's Item Lister last week when

one of the selectives called for help because

they weren't getting the Congressional Record. That title did not show as selected by them on

the Item Lister. Previously, we would never have had access to their items selected list and would not have been able to check that

possibility and provide help. GPO has much

good information of its own up and provides

files for others to work with and enhance. Enhanced Shipping List Service - University of Texas, Arlington, SUNY, Buffalo, GPO

http://libaix01.uta.edu/shiplist/ The enhanced shipping list service is a great help to regionals and should help traffic about

shipping lists on GOVDOC-L by providing a

title search that identifies shipping lists. It is great for identifying separates that get 81
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

separated from their shipping list. This GPO/university partnership is an example of collaboration to improve depository

management, and it is also an example of another traditional librarian role: building

partnerships.

Build Partnerships

GPO Access Gateways

http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/ aaces004.html Long before the shipping list partnership, GPO

partnered with libraries to create Gateways to GPO Access. Ann Sanders, on this panel, represents a Gateway library so the amount of time this important innovation deserves can be

given it. Infomine - University of California, Riverside

h ttp ://l i b-www. u c r.ed u/gov i n fo . h tm I Infomine was begun at UC Riverside and is now a collaborative project between all nine UC campuses and Stanford University Government information librarians. More than HTML coded links, this site is a database with

a sophisticated search engine looking for librarian assigned indexing terms. This one is a major undertaking and is beyond most of our

capabilities, but I'm glad someone can do it. Grants Government Information Sharing Project

Oregon State University http://www.govinfo.kerr.orst.edu/ The Department of Education funded this site with the original purpose of demonstrating

improved access to electronic Government

information especially for remote users and the general public. The Census information found

here is from Government CD-ROMs. A

fabulous resource.

Federal Web Locator - Villanova Center for Information Law and Policy http://www.law.vill.edu/

I'm sure everyone is familiar with Ken

Mortensen's Federal Locator at Villanova. This

is a great place to search for agencies and

departments without having to know

Government structure. Unsung Heroes and Award Winners Government publications librarians are doing

things behind the scenes to improve the work

those outside our profession will be unaware

of. These are the sites you won't see mentioned in computer magazines and

newspapers columns but are very useful to documents librarians. Other Government

publications librarians are way out there,

visible and award winning. Needs and Offers List - Kevin Reynolds,

University of the South

http://www.sewanee.edu/dupontlibrary/

GovDocs/govdoc.html

Kevin is providing a much needed and time- consuming resource for documents librarians. Home Pages - Grace York, University of Michigan

http://www.lib.umich.edu/libhome/Documents

.center/ Grace York's pages came up in April, 1995. I first saw them in December 1995 when we

first got Web access. I knew immediately I was seeing what librarians should be doing

with this new resource, the Web. I couldn't

possibly have chosen a single page from her

collection. She has it all. Her Web site was

the innovation beginning. She has been my

inspiration for creating Web pages, and I make

no secret of my hero worship.

Electronic Government information may have

forced our hand, but documents librarians have been up to the challenge. They are out

there running circles around everyone else in recognizing the instructive and collaborative opportunities of the Web. I've always felt very

lucky to be a documents librarian. It takes a

special, dedicated person to be good at this. We should all congratulate ourselves on

82
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

making it through the last few years, sometimes barely hanging on by our

fingernails, and we should congratulate ourselves that, more than just hanging on, we

have taken a new medium and shown our

profession what can be done with it.

83
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

Bibliographic Access to Electronic Resources:

International Standards

Summary of Remarks

Jean Hirons

Library of Congress Washington, DC

CONSER Guidelines for Online Versions

In August 1996, the CONSER (Cooperative Online Serials) Program issued its "Interim Guidelines for Online Versions" that gives

participants the option for creating separate records for remotely-accessed versions of printed (or other format) serials or noting the existence of the online version on the record

for the original. The latter has been dubbed

the "single-record" approach. The need for the single-record approach encompasses both economics and access. While online versions are proliferating and

potentially doubling the workload of

institutions such as GPO, the same institutions are losing staff, particularly professional

catalogers, and are being forced to do more

with less. At the same time, reference

librarians, frustrated with the proliferation of records created for microforms, favor a single- record approach that will tell patrons what the

library has and in what format. One of the problems, however, is the divergent needs of shared and local databases. For the shared database, such as OCLC, the record must represent what exists and be free from local data in order to be useful to all libraries. Locally, libraries must contend with

the varying abilities of their automated

systems, including how information displays to the users. Because each local system differs, national and international standards cannot be

written that will address their individual needs.

Instead, standards are written that will accommodate the national-level record.

The single-record approach is an alternative to cataloging. The provisions for giving a note

(field 530) and added entry (field 740) for a

related version are accommodated by rules in the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules, 2nd

ed. (AACR2). The only departure from

traditional practice is in providing the

electronic location (field 856) and in not

creating a separate record for the online

version. The single-record approach is possible for online versions because there is generally only one version and it is produced

by the same publisher as the original. The

ability to directly access the publication from

the 856 field in the cataloging record also means that less information about the version may be needed. However, information

regarding access restrictions and variations in

title is considered necessary. CONSER libraries have been using the guidelines and find them to be adequate for the present. During a discussion at ALA

Midwinter, CONSER representatives made it clear that they wish to continue the policy for the near future. The Library of Congress is also

in the process of developing guidelines for internal use that will provide criteria for when

to apply the single-record option and how to construct the note. These guidelines will be

issued as part of the Library's Descriptive Cataloging Manual.

For more information on the CONSER

guidelines: CONSER home page:

http://lcweb.loc.gov/acq/conser/ 84
J997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

The CONSER home page includes CONSER Cataloging Manual, Module

31, Remote-Access Computer File Serials and the Interim Guidelines for Online Versions.

Journal of Internet Cataloging

I have written an article on this topic

that will appear in v. 1, no. 2 of this new journal from Haworth Press.

The final papers will be posted on a Web site for world-wide review this summer.

For more information: The JSC Web site is at:

http://www.nlc-bnc.ca/jsc/index.htm

Issues Related to Serial ity While online versions are one problem, a potentially more difficult problem for cataiogers is the fact that many serials are changing their form when they go online. Rather than being issued in a succession of numbered parts, many serials are turning into databases of searchable data or articles. The

change from multiple issues and chief sources

to an updating work with a single chief source

has important ramifications for our cataloging

rules.

Crystal Graham (UC San Diego) and I have been invited to address these problems and how they might be addressed in AACR2 at a conference to be held next October in Toronto. The Conference on the Principles and Future Development of AACR is sponsored by the Joint Steering Committee

(JSC) on the Revision of AACR and is by

invitation only. Our paper considers ways in which we might

redefine "serial" in order to accommodate

differing forms of multiple versions of the same work and how such redefinition would impact on the cataloging rules used to create bibliographic records for serials. We will address the possible return of latest entry cataloging for updating works and look at the ways in which change is accommodated in our

records. The paper also introduces the concept of the "ongoing publication" and

offers principles that should be applied when

cataloging ongoing publications.

85
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

Bibliographic Access to Electronic Records:

National Standards

Thomas A. Downing

U.S. Government Printing Office

Wasliington, DC .

Good morning. It is a pleasure to be here today with Jean Hirons of the Library of Congress, and Wil Danielson, Eileen Seremeth, and Steve Uthoff of the Government

Printing Office (GPO) Cataloging Branch. We have an ambitious schedule this morning. To move things forward I will limit remarks to general matters associated with cataloging

operations. Those interested in our Internet related Cataloging Guidelines as a follow up to this morning's program will find two guidelines of potential interest. Our guidelines for cataloging electronic files and for linking records are available on GPO Access at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/dpos/

fdlppubs.html.

At the present time, more than 1 ,700 Monthly

Catalog records contain Internet related URLs. While many records represent monographs,

most represent serial titles. Although not developed for maps and monographs, we apply selected Internet related CONSER policies to these materials. The authority of CONSER policies and their widespread use as guidelines within

institutions that produce Internet related records create a solid foundation for application to serials, maps, and monographs. While people continue to discuss options for some sort of generic "cataloging" of Internet related titles, the benefits associated with providing Internet access through records

produced in accordance with AACR2 are undeniable. Agencies of the United States Government are using the Internet in an

increasingly responsible manner for publishing

information of importance. Such information warrants the AACR2

cataloging required to assure electronic access

to publications via online public access

catalogs. Although continued access to electronic texts via Monthly Catalog records is not assured, trends in Internet related publishing suggest that the future of continued

access will be better with each passing year. Outreach efforts by Robin Haun-Mohamed

and personnel of the Depository

Administration Branch, specifically their efforts to identify and produce stable and long lasting presentations of published information, should produce tangible results. This work is complemented by efforts undertaken by Duncan Aldrich and Electronic Transition Staff (ETS) personnel to develop partnerships with

various institutions to store electronic publications and provide long term access to them. These combined efforts should further contribute to the value of our cataloging, increasing the probability that Monthly Catalog

records will provide hot-linked access to most

of the electronically available titles they

represent. The availability of CONSER policies to guide

our efforts and the suitability of OCLC's

environment to produce these records have

helped us to react quickly to a relatively new

environment. These conditions have been

useful to Steve Uthoff and others of us within

86
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

the Cataloging Branch who have worked to establish suitable internal guidelines. During

this process, Jean Hirons has provided

guidance to us from the perspective of CONSER.

These efforts and the work of our catalogers have contributed to our current status as the second largest producer of OCLC records with URLs.

I would like to conclude by thanking Jean, who, as the Acting CONSER Coordinator, has wisely permitted member institutions to determine for themselves if they wish to use

records for physical forms for recording

Internet access related information for electronic versions or if they wish to produce a separate record for such resources. The "Interim Guidelines for Online Versions of Printed Serials" do not require CONSER

institutions to produce a separate record for an

electronic version if a suitable physical form

record may be enhanced with Internet access

related information. Based on this interim guideline, institutions may decide for themselves if a separate record is required.

This optional approach is well suited to our

needs. Although we expect that an increasing number of serials and monographs may

originate as "Internet only" titles, recent experience indicates that most titles, particularly serials, retain physical forms and assume additional availability via the Internet. Were it not for the option to use a single record for both versions, our workload could

increase without a corresponding increase in the number of titles. Such a situation would

jeopardize our ability to produce cataloging records in a timely manner. CONSER's Interim Guidelines are useful for

their practical applications within cataloging operations and, as appropriate, are appreciated

for providing a "single record" approach for public access. With many titles in both

physical and electronic forms, CONSER's

policies minimize a potential increase in

workloads and provide access to many

electronic titles in ways that are acceptable to most institutions. Thank you for being with us this morning. At

this time I will turn our program over to Wil

Danielson who will provide insights and

examples of cataloging Internet related titles.

87
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

Internet Cataloging at GPO

Wilfred D. Danielson

U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, DC

Good mornjng. I'll make a few comments

about cataloging remote electronic resources

or "Internet documents" and then, with Joe

Paskoski's help, will show some examples

from the online Monthly Catalog (MOCAT).

The first Internet-related records I produced

had already been cataloged by GPO in paper

so it was just a matter of adding the few extra

fields. My first "Internet only" record, however, gave more of a sense of going into new territory. This was partly because of the computer file format, but the novelty was not

so much the cataloging as beginning to access and use the Internet. My first impression of the Internet was that it is incredibly fast. Later this enthusiasm was to be tempered by delays and the inconvenience of cataloging from the Internet. Searching for publications lacks precision. Access to files may be slow. The remote file will sometimes

vary slightly from what may be essentially the same document in paper. The imprint and

colophon may be lacking. The contents or the URL of a "publication" may change. The

remote file is not only intangible but may be a moving target.

Description of electronic files requires more

thought than typical paper documents do. Notes are mostly cataloger-composed rather than quoted. This all takes more time, but the

possibility of accessing the document itself makes it worth the effort. By providing

accurate description and the hot linked URL,

the cataloger, in effect, brings the document to the user. This feature alone far outweighs any

inconvenience of working with remote files.

At a time when cataloging was becoming a bit routine, the Internet added a new dimension.

It also caused a new level of professional

interest and activity. Now we'll look at some examples of MOCAT

Internet records. The first is OCLC 3574721 6, The Constitution

of the United States of America. For this one we will take some extra time to demonstrate MOCAT Web applications. From the search

results screen, we can click on the URL in the

brief record, accessing the document in one

step. We should note that the text record is identical to the HTML record, but is not hot

linked. The HTML record is hot linked both from the URL in its brief record display and in the 856 field of the full record.

This title is an example of adding the Internet

availability information to an LC record. For

that we added the 2nd 074, item number

(online); the 530, "Also available from GPO

Access ..."; and the 856, URL. This congressional is one of the few at the Web site which was assigned a URL.

Next is OCLC 35812475, The 1944-45 New

York and Washington-Moscow KGB Messages.

This is an example where there was a bibliographic record for the paper version of the document, but GPO had not cataloged or

distributed it. So we added the 074 (and

there's only one); the 500, "Not distributed"

note; the 530, which has "Available via" rather than "Also available via"-because it was not

distributed; and the 856. My last example is OCLC 36505727, The KGB

in San Francisco and Mexico City... This is an
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

Internet only or computer file record. No

record for it existed in OCLC. Since this document is neither serial nor map, a K

(minimal) level record was created. Unlike the previous examples, this record has the 245

subfield h, with the general material designation "computer file" (soon to be

"electronic resource"); no 300, physical

description; the 538, mode of access (instead of 530 availability) note; and the 500, source

of title note.

The KGB in San Francisco and Mexico City and the GRU in New York and Washington,

[computer file] /. [1995?] United States. D 1.2:97008186. [[0306 (online)]],

http: //www. nsa.gov. : 80B0/docs/venona/monographs/monograph-4 .html <001> ocm36505727

<005> 19970307140858.0 , <040a> GPO

<040c> GPO <035a> (GPO) apn97-008186

<074a> 0306 (online) <086a> D 1.2: 97008186 <099a> D 1.2: 97008136

<04 9a> GPOO

<245a> The KGB in San Francisco and Mexico City and the GRU in New York and Washington

<245h> [computer file] <245c> National Security Agency.

<24 6a> GRU in New York and Washington

<260a> Fort George G. Meade, Md. : <260b> National Security Agency, <260c> [1995?] <440a> VENONA historical monograph ; <440v> # 4 <538a> Mode of access: Internet from the National Security Agency web site. <500a> Title from title screen. <590a> [cat:wd] <650a> Espionage, Soviet <650z> United States <650x> History

<650x> Sources

.

<650a> Intelligence service

<650z> United States <650x> History

<650x> Sources

.

<610a> Soviet Union. <610b> Komitet gosudarstvennoi bezopasnosti

<610x> History

<610x> Sources

.

<610a> Soviet Union. <610b> Glavnoe razvedyvatelnoe upravlenie

<610x> History

<610x> Sources

.

<710a> United States. <710b> National Security Agency. <856u> http: //www . nsa . gov . : 8080/docs/venona/monographs/monograph-4 .html <8562> http

<990a> 97-00012

89
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

Internet Cataloging at GPO

Eileen Seremeth

U.S. Government Printing Office

Wasliington, DC

I believe that-l cataloged my first "Internet" title during the summer of 1 996. At first, I felt it wasn't as bad as expected because I was

familiar with AACR2, chapter 9 when

cataloging CD-ROMS for about ten years. With training, learning new Internet terminology and having GPO Guidelines for online cataloging, I felt comfortable

functioning with this newest type of cataloging. Yes, when we first started, it took a

bit longer to catalog electronic titles because many of us had to develop Web browsing

skills and there were many unanswered

questions and problems with electronic titles. GPO Cataloging Guidelines for online

cataloging were developed during 1 996. To catalog, I first search the OCLC data base and decide whether the titles would be

cataloged in minimum level (if there are no OCLC records) or full level (if OCLC records

are found and can be adapted). Once I have

the URL, I add 074, 530 and 856 fields to existing OCLC records. If there is no existing record, I catalog the title originally in minimum level by adding 074, 538 (mode of

access), 500 (title from online title screen), and 856 fields. Internet cataloging is not really that

difficult but different. We will improve as time goes on. The GPO cataloging record for The Resource

Directory for Older People was added to the OCLC as an adaptation. A paper copy had

previously been cataloged by another library. This document, even though for sale by GPO,

was not distributed to depository libraries in paper or microfiche.

1 . There is only one 074 field which contains

the GPO item number and the format of

the document. This document is currently

available to depository libraries as a remote

file.

2. A 500 (not distributed...) note is necessary

to show that the document has NOT BEEN DISTRIBUTED to depository libraries in a physical form (paper or microfiche).

3. A 530 (Also available...) note is also needed to indicate the availability of the remote file and will also give the Federal agency Web site location.

4. The 856 field includes the URL. Formation

of this field is important. Once the record

is uploaded to the MOCAT Web site, the URL is hot linked to the document. The document. What Employers Expect of College Graduates, was cataloged for the OCLC as an adapted record. After searching

the OCLC data base, I found that this document had been cataloged and distributed

to depository libraries sometime during 1 994

in a paper format. As per GPO Cataloging

Guidelines, I compared the online version with the paper record and determined both documents were the same and the OCLC

record would be adapted.

1. There are two 074 fields. This document is currently available to depository libraries as a paper format and a REMOTE FILE.

2. The 530 (Also available ...) and 856 fields are added to the record. The document. Using Technology to Support

Education Reform, was cataloged using an

existing OCLC record. It was previously

90
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

cataloged by another library and adapted by 1 . A 530 (Also available ...) field. GPO. It is also available as a sales item by

GPO as noted by the stock number in the 037 2. A 856 field, field and the price in the 020 field. We have

also added a 074 field to indicate its online

availability. The following fields were also added to the existing record: Using technology to support education reform /. [1993] United States. ED 1.302:T 22/7. GPO stock no.: 065-000-00604-9.

[ [0461-D-05] ]

.

http: //www. ed. gov/pubs/EdReformStudies/TechReforms <001> ocm29205672

<005> 19970108121334.0

<040a> NIE <040c> NIE <040d> GPO

<020a> 0160420482 : <020c> $7.00 <035a> apn 93-081743 <035b> GPO

<037a> 065-000-00604-9

<037b> GPO

<074a> 0461-D-05

<074a> 0461-D-05 (online) <086a> ED 1.302:T 22/7 <088a> OR 93-3231 <090a> LB1028.3

<090b> .M43 1993 <099a> ED 1.302:T 22/7 <049a> GPOO

<245a> Using technology to support education reform

<245c> Barbara Means ... [et al . ]

.

<260a> Washington, D.C : <260b>U.S. Dept. of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, Office

of Research, <260c> [1993] <300a> 110 p. : <300b> ill. ; <300c> 28 cm. <500a> Shipping list no. : 93-0601-P. <500a> "September 1993" —T.p. verso. <530a> Also available via Internet at the U.S. Dept. of Education web site. <504a> Includes bibliographical references (p. 95-110)

.

<500a> "OR 93-3231" —P. [4] of cover. <500a> "Contract no. RR91172010" —T.p. verso. <590a> [cat:es] <650a> Educational technology

<650z> United States. <650a> Educational change

<650z> United States. <650a> Educational innovations

<650z> United States. <700a> Means, Barbara, <700d> 1949- <710a> United States. <710b> Office of Educational Research and Improvement. <710b> Office of Research. <856u> http://www.ed.gov/pubs/EdReformStudies/TechReforms

<B562> http

<990a> 97-05372

91
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

A cataloging record for Information Warfare and Deterrence was added to the OCLC

database as an original record. There was a LC

CIP record already in the database, but because there was no description of paper or microfiche to compare with the online version, GPO Cataloging Guidelines require that we

input an original computer file record. The following fields are unique to this computer fil^e record:

1 . The 074 field shows that the document is currently available only on the Internet.

2. This document requires delimiter "h" (computer file) in the 245 field per OCLC

guidelines, noting that this is an original computer file record.

3. Please note that there is no 300 field because this is an Internet record which

doesn't have a description for physical form per GPO guidelines.

4. A 500 note is needed to indicate the origin of the title: "Title from title screen."

5. The 538 field is needed for computer file records to indicate the "mode of access." This field also gives the Federal agency Web site.

6. The 856 field is added.

Information warfare and deterrence, [computer file] /. [1996] National Defense

University. 0 5.402:97010026. [ [0378-H-Ol (online)]].

Inttp: //www. ndu . edu/ndu/inss/boo]<s/iwd/index . html <001> ocm36271184 ' ' <005> 19970128134940.0

<040a> GPO

<0 4 0c> GPO -

- <035a> apn 97-010026

<074a> 0378-H-Ol (online) <086a> D 5.402:97010026 , <099a> D 5.402: 97010026 , _ Z , <049a> GPOO

<100a> Wlieatley, Gary F.

' <245a> Information warfare and deterrence

<2451i> [computer file] / <245c> Gary Wheatley, Richard E. Hayes. <260a> [Washington, D.C.?] : <260b> Institute for National Strategic Studies, <260c> [1996] <500a> Title from title screen. <538a> Mode of access: Internet from the Institute for National Strategic Studies web

site

.

<530a> Also available in paper. <590a> [cat; jmn;2ND CORRECTED CARDS] <650a> Information warfare. <650a> Deterrence (Strategy) <651a> United States ' <651x> Military policy. <700a> Hayes, Richard E. <710a> National Defense University. <710b> Directorate of Advanced Concepts, Technologies, and Information Strategies. <776a> Wheatley, Gary F. <776t> Information warfare and deterrence

<8 5 6a> http : //www. ndu. edu/ndu/ ins s /books /iwd/ index . html <8562> http

<990a> 97-00039

9T
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

Internet Cataloging of Serials at GPO

Steven R. Uthoff

U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, DC

When GPO first began cataloging remote

serials and monographs in 1993, our

cataloging of remote files was limited to the Federal Bulletin Board and our cataloging

instructions for remote files were less than one

page long.

In 1 995, we began to consult CONSER

Cataloging Manual, Module 31, when

cataloging remote serials. Then in early 1996, GPO expanded its cataloging of remote files and we began to develop additional GPO

guidelines for them. From the beginning,

these guidelines have been consistent with

national standards, particularly CONSER

standards. When cataloging remote serials, we follow the

special instructions in the GPO Cataloging Guidelines that were designed to reduce the time needed to catalog remote files. The physical form and remote file records GPO creates using the single record approach

are, with a couple of exceptions, the same as they would be if we created separate records and linked them only with linking note fields. The special GPO standards for remote serials are as follows:

1 . Strict adherence to the AACR2 definition

for serials when determining if a remote

file is a serial.

2. The employment of full-level cataloging

standards.

3. The use of the word "some" at the beginning of the 530 field notes that

describe remote files. This was suggested

by our serial catalogers.

4. When there is more than one URL for a remote serial, the one we transcribe in the

serial catalog record is the one for the

entire "run" of issues. Another thing that GPO does differently when

cataloging serials is to create individual

availability records for specific issues. GPO

does not create these for periodicals. Now let's turn to some examples of serial cataloging records that appear in the Monthly

Catalog. The first serial example is a "remote file record" which we recently created for the online version of the Commerce Business

Daily. It has the same special "remote file" fields that Wil and Eileen pointed out in their examples. In addition, it contains special serial fields and it was created following special

serial cataloging practices.

Fields of note are:

• TheOIOfield, which has a CONSER

authentication number that was added by

the GPO cataloger.

• Next, the 1 30 "main entry-uniform title" field. At the end of this field, we see a

qualifier, which begins with the word

"Online."

• Note the absence of a 300 field.

• Further down is a 310 field, with the frequency, which is daily.

93
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

• We have a 520 "summary" note, which

can be included in full-level remote file records.

• There is 538 "mode of access" note.

• A 580 "linking field complexity" note, with

information on the paper version.

• And a 787 "nonspecific relationship entry"

field, linking this record to the catalog record for the paper. The second example is an availability record

for the quadrennial serial that is known as the Plum Book, but actually has the title: United

States Government Policy and Supporting

Positions. Here, we have used a physical form

record to provide information on the paper and online versions of this publication. As mentioned earlier, this does not mean we are cataloging both on the same record. Only the

rules in AACR2, chapter 12, were followed when this record was updated to include information on the online version. Information on the online version is provided only in three

fields. These are the 074 field, item number;

530 field, additional forms available note; and

the 856 field, URL address.

• We have three 074 item number fields in this record since it is providing information on three different versions of this publication. The first is for the paper, the second for the microfiche, and the third for the online version.

• In the 300 field is the physical description

for the paper.

• We have a 530 note, which begins with

the words "Some issues...." This is GPO's

standard style for serials.

• Note that are no 776 linking entry fields since we have chosen to represent all versions (paper, microfiche, and online) in a single record.

• At the bottom, we have a 949 field with

the initials AVR, which means this record

is an availability record.

United States government policy and supporting positions /. I960-. Quadrennial. United States. Y 4.G 74/7:P 75/6/996. GPO stock no.: 052-070-07076-5. [ [1016-A] ]

.

http : / /www . access . gpo . gov/plumbook/toc . html

<001> ocm07111837 ,

, <005> 19961121113103.0 - <010a> 89643528 ^ t <010z> sn 88039058 \ . '

, <040a> GAG '

" <040c> GAG . '

: <040d> UDI .

, - • <04 0d> DLC

<04 0d> NST : <040d> GCL ; <040d> DLC

' <OAQd> HUL

<040d> GCL

<040d> GPG

<040d> NST ' . <040d> DLC . <040d> GPG

<012a> 3

' <012b> 3 <012i> 8907 <019a> 7825325 , : :

.

' <019a> 14225482 <035a> apn 97-006035

<035b> GPO

<037a> 052-070-07076-5

94
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

<037b> GPO

<037c> $21.00 <037f> paper copy <042a> Ic <043a> n-us <050a> JK661 <050b> U55 <074a> 1016-A

<074a> 1016-B (MF) <074a> 1016 (online) <074z> 1037 (online) <086a> Y 4 . P 84/10: P 75/ <086a> Y 4 .G 74/9: <0B6z> Y 4.G 74/9:S.PRT. 102-509 <086a> Y 4 .G 74/7 : P 75/6/ <099a> Y 4.G 74/7:P 75/6/996

<049a> GPOO

<245a> United States government policy and supporting positions

<245c> Committee on Post Office and Civil Service, United States Senate.

<24 6i> Conventionally known as: <246a> Plum book

<246a> Policy and supporting positions <246a>U.S. government policy and supporting positions

<246f> <1980->

<260a> Washington : <260b> U.S. G. P.O.

,

<260c> 1960- <300a> V. ; <300c> 28-31 cm. <310a> Quadrennial

<362a> 86th Congress, 2d session ([19601)- <490a> 1984- : S. prt

.

<500a> At head of title: Committee print. <500a> Previously classed: Y 4.P 84/10:P 75/ and Y 4.G 74/9: <500a> Issue: 104th Congress, 2nd session, Nov. 13, 1996 (Available online, to be distributed in paper and MF)

.

<530a>Vols. for <1984-> distributed to some depository libraries in microfiche. <530a> Some issues also available via Internet at the GPO Web site. <550a> Issued variously by: U.S. Congress. Senate. Committee on Post office and Civil

Service, and: U.S. Congress. House. Committee on Post Office and Civil

Service, 1960-1980; variously by: U.S. Congress. Senate. Committee on Governmental Affairs, and: U.S. Congress. House. Committee on Post Office

and Civil Service, 1984-19 ; by: U.S. Congress. House. Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, <1996-> <550a> Material compiled by: United States Civil Service Commission, 1960- <590a> [cat:ml/rev:su] <651a> United States <651x> Officials and employees

<651x> Directories.

<650a> Government executives

<650z> United States <650x> Directories.

<710a> United States. <710b> Congress

.

<710b> House. <710b> Committee on Post Office and Civil Service. <710a> United States. <710b> Congress. <710b> Senate. <710b> Committee on Post Office and Civil Service. <710a> United States. <710b> Congress. <710b> Senate. <710b> Committee on Governmental Affairs. <710a> United States. <710b> Congress. <710b> House. <710b> Committee on Government Reform and Oversight. <710a> United States Civil Service Commission.

95
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

<830a> S. prt. <850a> CtY-L ,

,

.

' <850a> DLC ' ' ' " • <850a> MH-KG

<850a> NIC , <850a> TU <856z> Online version:

<85 6u> http: //www. access . gpo . gov/plumbook/toc . html <8562> http

<936a> 104th Congress, 2nd session (Nov. 13, 1996) LIC

<94 9a> AVR

<990a> 97-04065

While most of the time GPO uses the single record approach when cataloging remote files, there are special circumstances where we

create separate records for the physical form and online versions. The first circumstance is when there is a

significant difference in the contents. The second circumstance is when we discover

that an existing physical form record is unsuitable for use to catalog the remote file version because of known or suspected

bibliographic problems. The third circumstance is when we catalog the remote file first and must create a remote file record because there are no existing physical form records on OCLC.

The fourth circumstance is when we catalog publications of major significance. In the final example, we have an instance where GPO has created separate records for the online and

physical form versions of a publication. The

record for the remote file version of the

Analytical Perspectives part of the Budget of the United States Government and a comparable record for the paper version are good examples this circumstance.

In this record, the fields of note are:

• The 240 field with a uniform title which

has the word "online" as a qualifier.

• There is 538 "mode of access" note.

This time we have included a 776 "linking entry" field, linking this record to the catalog

record for the paper version, and a 787

"nonspecific relationship" field, linking this record to records for the other online budget

publications and the CD-ROM. We did not

include these kinds of fields in the previous

example, because we chose the single record approach for that document.

96
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

Moving From Print to Electronic Dissemination:

When to Do it And How

The National Ocean Service Tide Prediction

Tables Experience

Richard L. Sillcox

National Ocean Service

Silver Spring, MD

Among the many products of the Department

of Commerce, National Oceanic &

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Ocean Service, the Tide Prediction Tables are one of the oldest. Since their introduction in the early 1800's, many constituencies and

regulations had grown up around them, adding

to the complexity of instituting change. When

change become inevitable, a period of

learning, compromise and adjustment

followed. Background

At the beginning of the nineteenth century, the

leaders of the United States of America

recognized that our economy was dependent upon its fledgling maritime capabilities. And

so, in 1807, Thomas Jefferson created the Survey of the Coast. Besides the activity of mapping and charting our coasts and harbors

in support of maritime safety and commerce,

there was the need to measure the rise and fall of the daily tides and to compute datums such

as Mean Sea Level. This had been done from

earliest times by individual Port Captains, but now there was a national need for coordinated measurements and common datum definitions.

Systematic water level measurements in the United States, which are the basis for tide predictions, date from about 1805 in New

York harbor. By 1 830, the first tide predictions

for the United States were formally published

in The American Almanac. They included the

daily time of high water for Boston, New York and Charleston, with time differences for 96

other stations. In 1 867, the first Tide Tables were published, initiating the presentation format which is essentially the same as that still used today. In the intervening years the

publication went from East Coast coverage in one volume to global coverage in seven volumes. Meanwhile, in 1 836 the Survey of the Coast became the Coast Survey. In succeeding years the Coast Survey would become the Coast and Geodetic Survey

(1878), the National Ocean Survey (1970), and

finally the National Ocean Service (1982). The National Ocean Service has been the custodian of the tide prediction information at an enviable time in history. Every few years technological innovation creates new

distribution vehicles for information in general, and every few years society creates a new class of users of and stakeholders in the tide prediction information. By closely monitoring

its information holdings and their evolving

relationship to society and technology, the National Ocean Service has actively sought to change the way it does business in its endeavor to better serve the Nation.

Stakeholders There is quite an array of stakeholders having

an interest in the Tide Tables. Some represent

a traditional way of doing business, tradition borne out of the harsh reality of practical

97
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

experience. With the recent proliferation of scalable computers and telecommunication

networks to satisfy every market niche, stakeholders representing new ways of doing

business continue to appear as well. All would need the benefit of an agency that understood their concerns and perspectives: an agency that could successfully draw all parties into the ongoing process of redefining their mutual roles; a process which would return value to all. The first group of stakeholders that come to mind are the ship captains and pilots responsible for vessels ranging in size from the

largest down through the smaller commercial

carriers, tug and barge combinations, and

those of our commercial fishing fleet. They are not at all interested in change for its own sake, but are very concerned with reliability, practicality, fail-safe operation and return on

investment. They know best how situations at sea can quickly become life-threatening when

poor planning or just plain bad luck intervene. They need products that perform. Another group is composed of the career civil servants who, from long-standing dialogue

with the members of the first group and even

personal experience at sea, are best able to appreciate and represent those interests before

others necessarily less intimate with the

subject. These civil servants also have the best

familiarity with the tide prediction information

in its various raw and finished forms, both in the public and private sectors. They would be

instrumental in suggesting new products and

practical means to achieving desired future courses of action. As America's merchant marine reached out

globally, so expanded the Tide Table

coverage, and international agreements between governments followed. As a consequence of incorporating international information in the U.S. Tide Tables it is necessary to honor foreign copyright laws and

other sensitivities to the release of their information. Some countries are simply not ready for more adventuresome modes of

distribution. We still receive some foreign

predictions in boxes quaintly wrapped with brown paper, tied with string and secured with

sealing wax. Other countries, though adopting modern technologies, are very wary of government and private partnerships for distribution. To facilitate the distribution of the Tide Tables

there developed over the years a global network of official NOAA Chart Agents. These

are retail outlets ranging in size from "mom

and pop" fishing tackle shops to the largest marine supply companies. NOAA not only

authorizes them to sell NOAA's products, but encourages them to sell only the latest product

editions by offering them good terms for the

return of unused product. Chart Agents are very proud of the trust relationship they share with NOAA.

Then, there are embodied in the laws and

regulations of the land what appear at first reading to be impediments to altering the way

the Tide Tables are produced and distributed. The Tide Tables published by the National Ocean Service are specifically named in the Code of Federal Regulations as the document

required aboard all vessels subject to U.S. Coast Guard inspection. And, while the

Secretary of Commerce is authorized to enter

into partnerships to accomplish Government

work, "all fees collected from the sale of... and

from any licensing of such products... shall be

deposited in the U.S. Treasury."^ This would

seem to remove all economic incentive for the

potential private sector partner interested in new arrangements for production and

distribution of book-form or electronic products. However, there are a number of parties quite

interested in new forms of production and

styles of distribution. For example, if the Government ever decided to cease printing the Tide Tables, there are a number of printing houses eager to fill the void. Of course they would only produce Tide Tables with the promise of economic return. Marginally

profitable geographical areas would be

dropped. There are also a number of private

entities wishing to place the Tide Tables on

98
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

electronic bulletin boards accessible by

subscription. This leaves unanswered the question of how the Tide Tables would be made available to ships at sea. As just alluded to, there is an existing and growing cadre of private companies offering

tide prediction information. Their products

run the gamut from pocket tide tables, office calendars with tide curves, to specialized products for sport fishermen and kayakers, up

to and including sophisticated software packages for personal computers. All this tide prediction information is derived from Government sources. Another new stakeholder for tide prediction information is a growing industry of electronic

nautical chart makers and Electronic Chart

Display & Information System designers. These products would be sanctioned "for navigational use" by international maritime

standard setting bodies, of which the United

States is a member, and so it is very much in the Government's interest to support them.

Users The utility of tide prediction information goes

well beyond navigation, and more uses become apparent as society's needs evolve. The National Ocean Service has sought to quickly recognize these new functions and

users and encourage them with new services. The National Ocean Service supports society's growing environmental concerns with new

customized product combinations tailored to each requestor. These answer regional and

city managers seeking data sets supporting

their research and policy needs. They are also used by consulting firms specializing in environmental studies on their own or on

behalf of public decision makers. The call for specialized data sets in response to unique needs continues to grow. Engineering and construction firms use our data to correlate with past structural failure events and to wisely

plan future designs and operations. Law

enforcement agencies seek information as

input to criminal and civil cases. Government

agencies at all levels now use tide prediction information to enhance the successful outcome

of programs for the benefit of their citizens. Universities constantly use the information in planning future field work and to correlate with their own data sets. Requests for "certified tide predictions" for presentation in courts of law are an example of change instituted from within the National Ocean Service by making imaginative use of simple technologies and attention to customer

needs. Certification times were cut from as much as two weeks to two days by taking full advantage of the National Ocean Service's consolidation at its new Silver Spring campus.

But a more important value was added to this product by sending a draft certification just a few hours after the request. The advantage to the customer was an immediate opportunity to evaluate the information, modify the request if necessary, act on the information in preparation for court, all the while confident

that the true "certification" would be in hand

within 48 hours. New and customized data formats support

other users. The National Ocean Service works closely with printers seeking to create products for an ever more diverse clientele. Educators at all levels need customized

products to use as examples in teaching and to plan student field trips. The National Ocean Service actively considered all of these users and stakeholders when the time came for change.

A Time For Change

As the midpoint of the development cycle for the 1996 Tide Tables approached, the word

was received that the funding to print the book

form of the Tide Tables would no longer be

available. Though the announcement came

suddenly, it was in fact an event whose time had come.

National Ocean Service management had

already been giving consideration to more

99
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

fitting roles for Government in the creation of the tide prediction information. In that light it had already begun to give thought to a range

of potential new relationships with its users, stakeholders and untapped partners in the

private sector. The lack of Government funding to print the Tide Tables was indeed a significant event. It had important maritime safety and legal aspects. It represented a potentially new

balance in the commercial market. And

finally, there were the implications arising out

of the perception of the event in the eyes of the stakeholders, users and other interested

parties. All these issues required enlightened and tactful leadership to effect a well regarded outcome. The National Ocean Service was capable of

effectively addressing these sometimes

conflicting issues because of its continuing

close and informed relationship with interested

parties. It was able to draw its stakeholders and user community into a new future reality while minimizing the disruption to each. It was able to quickly reach out to new partners

in the private sector under this special circumstance because of its experience with

private partners in related subject areas. The precipitous withdrawal of funding to print the Tide Tables forced the National Ocean

Service to adopt revolutionary methods of meeting user needs. It enabled the National Ocean Service to put into practice in one more

area of its authorized expertise the belief that the customer's needs must define the value of information as well as its format, time and

place utility. As customer preferences for information content, style and delivery become increasingly more diverse, no one

format or media type will best serve the maritime community. Furthermore, no one

organization is capable of serving all customer

preferences as expressed in the marketplace. Lessons Learned About six months lapsed from the time we first heard news about our lack of funding until we

and our partners had defined our future course. Obviously this period was the most

unsettling and disruptive, and from it we

acquired a few lessons. Move forward. Our internal deliberations to define the scope of our funding situation and

explore possible new printing and distribution scenarios for the Tide Tables was very focused. Spend your energy concentrating on defining and resolving issues that have a potential impact on your future maneuverability. Issues

that defined the past are almost irrelevant. Someone might suggest that an understanding

of the past provides perspective for the future. While this may be true, do not let it also become a trap to remaining unnecessarily enmeshed in practices of the past.

Information is only useful when shared. One

must do everything possible to shorten the awkward and destructive time of uncertainty. This means do your in-house homework as quickly as possible and bring it to resolution. Once you know where you stand, even if you do not yet know in detail where you are going, share this much in as tight a time frame as possible with all potentially interested parties. They will find out anyway and it might as well come from a single authoritative source. From

the range of responses to your initial contacts formulate as quickly as possible your future course of action and share it. Our internal and external deliberations involved many parties. Multiple conversations took place with, for example, the Defense Mapping Agency, the U.S. Coast Guard, the Government Printing Office, the NOAA and

Department of Commerce General Counsels, and finally the NOAA Chart Agents and the

private sector value-added-retailers of tide prediction information. Of all the parties in question the last two had to be treated with

great impartiality. With each party we had to go through the same process of education, reaction, negotiation or exploration and acceptance.

Initial reactions to the situation ranged from

disbelief and anger to acceptance and delight. 100
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

Touching base with each party was absolutely necessary to defining our future course, but each also added a delay to defining that course. With delay came the opportunity to add to the growing suite of rumors. Furthermore, angry respondents required

additional consultation and coaching to help them see their place in an as yet to be defined

future.

Special attention should be paid to your oldest constituencies. Their fear is what they might

or will lose under the new arrangement. Where possible show them how they can

participate in the future arrangement. Show

them hidden opportunities in the new

arrangement. It probably will not be their old

style of doing business and the financial picture may be different. It will be

uncomfortable for them, but they will appreciate learning of it and exploring it with you.

Special attention must also be paid to the newest of your interested parties. Ours were

private sector value-add-retailers and their overriding concern is that they have the same

opportunity to play in the new arrangement as

their competitors. In this regard we were very

successful in addressing their concerns. One is advised to keep detailed event and communication logs as documentation for the above. In the normal course of addressing a major change they will daily prove invaluable

in reminding yourself of what was said to whom and when. In the event that your management of the change process is challenged they will serve to help reconstruct

events.

Finally, an observation on using the valuable

resources at General Counsel. It must be remembered that their expertise and

perspective are of a legal nature. Yours might be programmatic or technical. Both must be combined to give you complete solutions in your new and changing situation. Seeing and

following only one of those points of view will lead to unsatisfactory results at best. And those

unsatisfactory results will, in all probability.

require you to revisit the question with the attendant loss of time and opportunity. Two Years Later

All of the above transpired in 1994-1995 as we

faced publication of the 1 996 Tide Tables. Our solution was to publish the tide prediction information on CD-ROM. The National Ocean Service then worked very closely with

interested private printers to help them

complete arrangements to print and distribute the Tables for retail sale and public use from

the CD-ROM. Today the National Ocean

Service continues in that role. The National Ocean Service occupies a unique

position vis-a-vis tide prediction information. It is the Government agency authorized by

Congress to engage in the observation,

analysis, creation and dissemination of such

information. This role is recognized by the community of nations and international standards setting bodies. For example, the National Ocean Service is the U.S. focal point

for the annual exchange of tide prediction information between nations and the maintenance of the international tide prediction database.

Closer to home the National Ocean Service continues to act under its policy that Government's business is to collect and

analyze scientific observations to create and

maintain a database of basic tide prediction information while its presentation in user- friendly forms is best left to the private sector. One inherent and key role for Government is the quality control of that tide prediction

information. Good quality assurance of the source data enables the value-added-retailer to exploit the full range of potential products and

the customer to use them with confidence. The World Wide Web is a new area where the National Ocean Service can play a constructive quality assurance role. The recent

proliferation of tide prediction information on

the Web has clearly brought this to light. As it has done successfully before, the National Ocean Service will use its knowledge of the 101
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

marketplace, its customers and its partners to address this new situation.

1 . Excerpt from United States Code, Title 44: §1307 (b)
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

The Bureau of justice Statistics' Rules for Living

on tlie Information Superhighway or How

Simplicity, Service, and Attention to Customers

Can Help Hustle Tons of Ripe Digital Bananas

Tom Hester

Bureau of Justice Statistics Wasiiington, DC

The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) received a wakeup call about 4 years ago. We're a small statistical agency employing

fewer than 60 people. About two-thirds of the

staff are devoted to analyzing numbers and

writing or producing publications. On average we publish a document a week-a book,

bulletin, or fact sheet. Our budget goes

primarily to collecting data, and it's not a large budget. And the budget starts and ends my brief story today. In 1993 we incurred a postage bill that had ballooned to nearly the size of Minneapolis. The publication dissemination budget line had to be shored up, and we had

to take a hard look at our future. The mailing costs were the negative side of our

success. We had a great, aggressive clearinghouse that shared a commitment to our

legislative mandate: We were to provide as much accurate, on-time statistical information about crime and criminal justice as possible and we were to do this at no charge to the

user. The debate student who called got a sheaf of reports about capital punishment. The

journalist received personal attention and a

thick packet of materials. The neighborhood watch captain went on our victimization mailing list. The thousands of agencies and men and women who contributed to our

surveys and censuses received the books that contained the answers they had given us; these were our only legal payoff for cooperation, and it was the least we could do.

But we had to cut back. We killed the glossy

quarterly summary of publications that at its height had gone to tens of thousands of homes

and offices. We made readers order each of our thick books of tables rather than receive them automatically. We substituted executive summaries for the numerical behemoths we

previously shipped to everyone. We scrimped on printing, and we began to think about

digital libraries. The BJS Electronic Library was what our

planning group called the public access facility that we wanted to create. The more visually oriented among us nominated Digital Gallery, but they lost. The concept of this BJS place was a walnut paneled reading room.

Overstuffed leather chairs. Sherry at 4 o'clock. When we determined that a couple of gigabytes would store our back list on-line, we

recognized at once that our electronic library would not be the Alexandrine national library that Transportation or Patents or Energy must

maintain. There were ways we could have dumped loads of numbers onto the Web site, but from the moment of conception the BJS

library was to be a place where the user could

find the right document right away. Unable to afford or even to find the search engine that

103
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

we wanted, we were committed to effective design. That early pledge to ease of access kept us on

course, but not all our best-laid plans ended so

happily.

In those days, excitement surrounded Internet components named after small burrowing

animals or comic book characters. What we

wanted forDur digital facility, we decided, was

a gopher site. Months passed. By the time we

actually dug our rodent den, few customers wanted to use it, and it now stands forlorn.

This last example of planning leads us to the puzzling BJS First Rule for Living on the Information Superhighway: What we plan we

ultimately don't want to reach so we should

plan really carefully. This rule is a kind of variant of the curse: "May you get what you hope for." Lurching ahead without a wellestablished, thought-out plan is foolish. In today's technological terrain, however,

resolutely following a considered plan to its bitter and dead end is equally silly. Here I must interrupt my story to tell you of some of the advantages that BJS enjoyed. We

did not have to build a electronic library fit for the Trump Palace because we helped to support organizations that were also serving our customers. BJS can be seen as a kind of network.

I have already mentioned the clearinghouse

managed by Aspen Systems: the National Criminal Justice Reference Sen/ice (NCJRS). Besides having a corps of experts responding

to calls on 1-800 lines, NCJRS operated a

bulletin board for distribution of our reports. Three other national or international criminal

justice professional groups that we support in part were also offering computer bulletin boards. So, for chatty folks and for the

technically proficient, willing to set parity bits and be patient with their 14.4 modems, BJS was at the ready.

For the lovers of encyclopedias and for reference librarians everywhere. The

Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics joined

us on-line from Albany, New York. BJS customers with file readers able to copy a table

to the clipboard could import contents directly

into their documents.

In the thin atmosphere of Ivies and the Big 10 and major research universities, BJS was

providing data files for analysis through the National Archive of Criminal Justice Data, at the University of Michigan. Member

universities could acquire our data on 9-track

tapes, and their students could swing

mainframes to crunch our survey results. From my little catalog of dispersed resources, you can see that we were still lacking. We

wanted to be omnipresent, with the apposite

statistic at just the right moment. Instead, in the railroading lingo of the pre-asphalt epoch, we were sitting on a siding far from the trunk

line of information.

At the time, all about us, major Federal agencies were throwing what seemed to be

terrabytes of information across the telephone

system. The BJS task force members could not even access those agencies hurling all those

data because the branch of Justice where we

reside had not yet gained World Wide Web

sepv'ice. Our capable task group chair, Marianne Zawitz, who has done the most to make the electronic library a reality, would

surf the Web at home and then bring us

reports, like a spy returning from the unknown

territory we were proposing to enter.

But in on-line capacity we at BJS weren't much

different from the people whom we try to

serve. We have an enforced modesty and

frugality. The criminal justice community and

people wanting criminal justice statistics do

not belong to the Sharper Image set, living fast on the cutting edge. I suspect it's as much a question of costs as desire, but if you live in a house fitted with Shaker furniture, pretty soon you come to appreciate the function and good

design of simplicity.

104
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

Our director had a colleague who was living in Mexico and dialing in with his 1400 baud modem on his laptop with the graphics turned

off. The constant question while we designed

the first pages was what would our Pueblan

correspondent see if he accessed BJS on-line? Such a consciousness of limitations continues

to guide us in how and what we offer our

digital users. About a quarter of the people who ask for our

publications are State or local government

employees: the policemen, sheriffs' deputies, and budget analysts; another quarter are in school as students or teachers; another quarter

are members of organizations-businesses,

community groups, foundations; and the last quadrant are a mixed group-the general

public, the media. Federal employees.

Interestingly, less than 10% of the total audience-the journalists and our bosses on the

Hill and in the White House-captured and still capture a large part of our attention, but the Web has certainly reduced the distance between the President and a third grader preparing a report on crime in his neighborhood.

I try to speak authoritatively about the borrowers from the BJS electronic library, but

don't let my tone fool you. We send out about

three-quarters of a million paper-and-ink

reports a year, and on average nearly a thousand people a day visit our site, but I still have only the dimmest notion of who our

readers are and what they want from us.

This is BlS's Rule Two for Living on the Information Superhighway: We admit our

ignorance, we try to correct it, but we don't let

it prevent us from acting. One valuable source of information at the pre- Web-site stage was a reader survey sent to the whole mailing list. From about 36,000 forms

sent, we received almost 6,000 responses. In fact, three and a half years after the survey, I continue to receive mangled questionnaires.

In sum, our readers told us that they belonged

to the fax generation. Two-thirds of them lived

at the corner where paper-and-ink and

electronic impulses cross, and when we acted on that knowledge, purchasing a fax on- demand service, we made one of our wisest decisions ever in terms of service and

workload. And when we substituted the massfax for a 32-cent mailing of newly released

reports, the savings were considerable. As you

know, the fax often smears illustrations, distorts fonts, and renders some documents into murky

blurs. But our readers love it. They like the convenience and speed of getting precisely what they want. It's their technology. Hence, a corollary to Rule Two just cited: Knowledge makes for better decisions than

ignorance, always. Our readers also told us that a healthy majority-about two-thirds-had a computer.

But in 1 994 there were a lot of lonely computer users: too many of our potential

library browsers owned an ancient version of WordPerfect. Fewer than 1 in 10 had a modem. We understood from our survey that our digital library would not replace the paper- and-ink publications. Rather, we would

expand our audience. As progress unfurls we discover that we were

right and wrong. We captured new readers, especially from the White House Web site because we provide the crime statistics for the

Social Statistics Briefing Room. Our old audience, however, is adding modems to its computers. We know this because, like air

traffic controllers, we guide them over the phone to the requested links on the Web.

They appreciate Marianne Zawitz's genius at keeping the site simple and direct, with none

of the labyrinthine embellishments that are the curse of World Wide Web excesses, but they

still get lost. Tell you the truth, so do I sometimes. Our first metaphor was an Electronic Library. Walnut and leather and sherry.

105
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

But there were issues that never belonged in a

library with a antique globe and vellum

bindings, and we had to address them. How

were we to account for documents that we

updated on the Web without a paper trail? We

decided to mark all of our Web documents where revisions occur and to record in a database each revision made. We anticipate

that someday we will be storing all site contents on CD-ROMs.

And how are scholars and journalists to cite what they find on our Web site? We are committed to constant maintenance and

improvement. While we will try to presence URL's to specific documents, sometimes both

the equipment and the design conspire to make bookmarks in perpetuity an

impossibility. So we are suggesting that citations include the date of a visit, our domain

and site names and the site category, omitting

the specific document designations that are

likely to be sacrificed. We are keeping a record of Web document names for anxious

researchers in need. While working in the library and still wrestling with the budget, we came to a new

understanding of what we wanted our Web

site to be: a digital library and a digital hothouse. Glass and light and air and the smell of growing things. According to my best reading of the Web

analysis of our site, our visitors want the simplest versions: given the choice between a PDF file and an ASCII file, they choose ASCII. Despite the sacrifice of readability and context, the typical Web user wants the easiest document to snatch, though some are probably checking the ASCII contents before they go through the more elaborate procedure

of accessing a PDF.

I don't applaud the preference for ASCII, but I am happy that we offer the choice. I am also happy that our customers have our report with

the Department of Justice press release and last year's version of the report and access to the

original data at Michigan and dozens of links that can add meaning to our report. All this

our customers enjoy as long as we don't stand

in their way. Here I feel another BjS Rule coming on: Number Three for Living on the Information Superhighway: The spirit behind the Henry

Ford option for Model T color-any color you want as long as it's black-does not apply to the

Internet. Only superlative selections at supermarkets on the superhighway will survive. That rule brings us to the BJS Web site today. We open our new Electronic Greenhouse in late April or early May, and those familiar with our site will find the same handsome simplicity and deep lists. All the paper and ink publications, as Adobe and ASCII documents,

will be offered. But more recent, high-interest information will be placed in HTML on the Web pages. To find key facts, a Web visitor

will not have to access a document first but can go directly to the desired statistics. There will also be the new Internet-only

publications. From the start we have had

spreadsheets for the larger tables published in paper and ink. Now we have spreadsheets too

large to fit on any paper smaller than half a basketball court. The interested user can copy

or download the data of interest and make his or her own graphs or tables. The Sourcebook is on its way to losing the book part of its name as it becomes a site that constantly updates contents as they are

available. At paper-and-ink publication time

the Source staff will copy the PDF files into a CD-ROM, and both the CD and the paper

version will be distributed. Remember when I noted that the budget would reappear in our story? In the past we

published documents of limited interest that contained every detail of a census, spilling like an oil tanker across a thousand pages. We

cannot afford to publish such documents

anymore, and so their contents are going

directly to the Web without the dusty detour to paper. For the readers without Internet access, we are offering to fax or to mail all the 106
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

numerical tables that they need. It's a case where the saving of a quarter-million dollars

inspires us to provide individualized services. To help readers and archivists keep up with our publication series and the welter of old

publications, the new site will offer a commonsense guide that will take the user to the most

recent report in a series.

After the greenhouse is constructed, I expect

that we will start using more CD-ROMs to record the data and publications for our customers and posterity.

I also anticipate that we will soon have a database in place to allow Web visitors to create unique tables. I believe it's called "onthe-fly." Soon we will begin to use the Internet to survey the prosecutors' offices and police

stations and other data sources. Our Internet

site will receive as well as send information.

After all these changes the Greenhouse

metaphor will have lost its value, and perhaps

a Daedalus image will take its place.

This conclusion leads me to the last BJS Rule

for Living on the Information Superhighway: The trip is better than the arrival, so it's best to be always leaving.

107
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference Moving From Print to Electronic Dissemination:

Why, When and How

Patent and Trademarl< Office Experience

Summary of Remarks

Martha Crockett Sneed

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Washington, DC

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is an Executive Branch agency under

the U.S. Department of Commerce, lam

pleased to be sharing the podium with colleagues from sister Commerce agencies, Census Bureau and NOAA. The USPTO is located in Crystal City, an Arlington, Virginia "neighborhood" located next door to National

Airport in the Washington, DC area. You are here at the National Airport Hilton. You are on our turf! I hope you take the time to tour

the public patent and trademark search

facilities which are included on your overall conference schedules. You should find them

fascinating facilities... but watch where you

glance or sit. Our patrons like to maintain the

strictest confidentiality in their work! Fundamental to the information dissemination

policy of the USPTO is the underlying purpose

of the U.S. patent system. In return for an

exclusionary monopoly bestowed on an

inventor by patent protection, an inventor fully discloses the invention to the USPTO, which

in turn prints and disseminates this information. This sharing of technology

implicit in every U.S. patent granted, spurs economic growth by providing information which is used for a variety of purposes,

including but not limited to competitive

intelligence, research and development, and

fostering creativity leading to the development

of new inventions. Clearly the quality of our

lives is impacted directly by a strong patent system, so getting this information out to those who need it is an imperative.

The USPTO is a Federal agency that has been

completely user fee funded since 1 99T The USPTO receives no taxpayer dollars. Various

"biases" have been expressed by today's panel members thus far in regard to information

dissemination. With our budget supported

entirely by user fees, the bias of the PTO is our

users, both current and potential. In recent

years, the USPTO has actively undertaken a

series of customer focus sessions with its many

and varied user groups, and has administered a

series of surveys to evaluate our current array

of products and services, and to determine what new products and services our customers want and in what format they require them. In the Commissioner's Annual Review,

information dissemination is not defined as our

mission, but as our business. Patent and

trademark filings do vary from year to year, so

fees taken in from these filings also vary. This most certainly impacts decisions made about

the USPTO's information dissemination policy

as we attempt to meet the needs expressed by

our users. To this end, the USPTO maintains a diverse

portfolio of information products supplied in a

variety of formats to its many users and

customers. The USPTO's Information Dissemination Organization's Catalog,

distributed via GPO's Federal depository

library network, for which you will find a flyer on the handout table outside, outlines this portfolio. In the Catalog you will find listings for our CD-ROM products, magnetic tapes, document supply services, and Internet 108
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

services. Our pricing philosophy is based on

cost of dissemination. We have a number of customers who buy our data, add value, and

offer the information for a wide variety of

prices, including free! A foundation for the USPTO's information dissemination strategy is the nationwide Patent and Trademark Depository Library (PTDL) Program, a program which had its foundation

in 1871 with the distribution of printed patents

to libraries. This Program now supports 81 member academic, public and state libraries, most of which are also GPO Federal depository libraries. The PTDL Program

provides source documents, training, toll-free

lines, equipment, access to specialized databases not available to others outside the PTO, and onsite support to its network. The USPTO also provides information to GPO

depository libraries through the provisions of

Title 44. There are exchange agreements in place with foreign counterparts to the USPTO.

In other words, the USPTO pushes its information out the door in a variety of ways

few truly know all about. As most of my fellow panelists have already alluded to, the bottom line in determining

information dissemination mechanisms is to achieve the right balance of cost versus customer. What follows is one example of how the USPTO moved from print to electronic format. The USPTO printed and

disseminated printed patents to PTDLs from 1871 to 1982. Patents issue weekly on

Tuesday. Every week for over one hundred

years, the USPTO would print copies for PTDL

distribution, box them and pay for shipment.

By the year 1 977, PTDLs were receiving 4 to 5 boxes a week. These boxes were densely

packed and very heavy, and were about the

size of a typical GPO depository shipment...

in other words, an expensive shipment. In 1978, the USPTO began to explore microfilm

for distribution of depository copies as a more

cost effective means of distribution. By 1 982,

all PTDLs agreed to accept microfilm over paper copy. Many were quite anxious to convert for space reasons. But the key to the

success of this transition was the time the USPTO took to achieve buy-in with the PTDLs

prior to conversion. The conversion began as

a voluntary conversion, but by the time it evolved to a mandatory conversion, the reasons were sufficiently clear to the PTDLs, and the replacement product was high quality. The next conversion, from microfilm to CD- ROM (the product known as USAPat) is currently underway. Again, the reasons for

this migration in format are clearly for reasons

of cost. Again, the transition time is over a long period to achieve buy-in from the PTDLs

and to build a quality product by the time the

transition is complete The success of this transition is still an unknown. But if the USPTO does a good job in building a product which the PTDLs find acceptable in their role as primary service providers for the USPTO,

the transition should be relatively painless. It should be noted that conversion from paper to microfilm to CD-ROM only impacted the PTDLs and our foreign exchange offices. The USPTO continues to print paper patents for the

patent examiner search files and the public

search files. The USPTO has yet to completely replace a

printed source document or publication with an electronic only version. Instead, the variety

of its offerings have increased over the years in direct response to user and customer needs and have been made possible by new

technologies (made possible, incidentally by

the existence of a strong U.S. patent system!). The USPTO is in an enviable position of having a good idea of who its primary users

are, and how to get in touch with them. The

goal of the agency is to balance its limited resources with the information needs of its users and customers. In doing so, it relies heavily on the PTDL network to provide public access points for this vital information across

the country. Because the agency is so directly accountable to its users, changes in how

information is provided are always done in consultation with these users, and always

keeping the balance of cost versus customer in mind.

109
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

Bibliographic Control in an Electronic FDLP:

Problems, Practices, and Policies

Cynthia Wolff

Northwestern University Evanston, IL

Let me start off by saying: I am not a cataloger, but I play one on GOVDOC-L.

When I was asked to provide some insight into the "problems, practices, and policies" of providing bibliographic access to electronic

resources, I was reminded of a joke by Mr.

Fred Allen, an old vaudeville comedian, who

wisely noted: A conference is a gathering of important

people who singly can do nothing, but

together can decide that nothing can be

done. Of course, he adopted his stage name, Fred

Allen, to honor the American Revolution hero

Ethan Allen-who, he noted, was no longer

using the name.

Fortunately, as we have heard from the first session's presenters, providing bibliographic access to electronic resources is becoming a

reality as more and more sources are migrating

to electronic only access. In the world of Government documents, this issue is not a new topic. There are some of us who are old enough to remember the receipt of good ol' Census Test Disk No. 2 in 1989. Of course,

that was one of the first instances that we

noticed the dangers of fugitive electronic documents. Did anyone ever see Census Test Disk No. 1? GPO has been cataloging electronic resources

since 1 989 when agencies began using the technology to distribute information. In fact, if you look in Administrative Notes (v. 10, no. 23)

for November 15, 1989, the GPO proudly announced:

...the Interior Department's CD-ROM

containing SLAR (Side-Looking Airborne

Radar) has been cataloged by GPO staff under OCLC number 20444603. The

record, produced on October 5, 1989,

contains a detailed description of the item which is titled "Joint Earth Sciences (JES-2) Demonstration Disc." The SuDocs class

for the disc is I 19.119:SI 1.

This was page one news! Why would that be such a big deal? Now, we

come to expect the CD-ROM and floppy disks

as part of our Monthly Catalog and that they have SuDoc numbers assigned. But, some of you may be as old as me and remember when we had the famous "Technology Tea" in 1990

as part of the Depository Library Council

followed up by a survey of libraries (see Administrative Notes, v.1 1, no. 26) in which

the GPO asked us: "Do you want everything even if it doesn't have technical documentation and software?" We said: "YES, we want everything, even if it doesn't have

technical documentation and software!" And

the GPO sent it, and we said: "HEY, where is the technical documentation and software for the TIGER files?" But, I digress. As we have all heard, the Federal Depository

Library Program has been mandated by

Congress to move into an Electronic Federal Depository Library Program in the next five years. Or is that seven? Anyway, fear not, I won't go into the history, politics, and

110
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

concerns of that part of reinventing government. And, as we know, a number of

titles have migrated into electronic only

format, a lot in CD-ROM as well as our friend, the Internet. Sorry, but I just have to throw in some more history for you.

In 1994, the 3''' Annual Federal Depository

Library Conference included an Internet panel

discussion in which Ann Miller, now of Duke

University, spoke about "The Internet and Academic Libraries." Ann said:

But slowly, as products have appeared which allow a little more organization of the material available on the networks, we

have begun to use the Internet as a ready

reference source and perhaps even a supplement to our local collections. I say supplement because there is still a way to go before I see the Internet as a complete

replacement for local materials.

Part of this panel included Maggie

Parhamovich Farrell, now of Montana State University, who presented a talk entitled "Internet Resources: U.S. Government

Information." At that time, all of Maggie's overheads consisted of gopher sites. Three

years later, we consider "gopher" to be out of

date. Even Grace York of the University of Michigan (another panelist) has recently announced the migration to the World Wide

Web of her resources. Of course, Grace had

already predicted in her talk that: Gopher will be replaced, at least in part, by Mosaic and Mosaic by another system and yet by another system. You may ask yourself: why is she reading old Administrative Notes and old Federal Depository Library Conference proceedings?

Looking back from 1 997, it seems almost

"silly" to re-live these past life experiences.

But, my point is that as government

information specialists, the issues of bibliographic access of electronic resources are not "new" to us. Even if you are not doing the

cataloging, you need to understand what is going on behind the scenes and be assertive

enough to make your voice heard in your

library. After all, bibliographic access is a public service issue. And you cannot just "assume" that the people in the technical

services (or in other areas of public services for that matter) are aware of what has been so "obvious" to us for the past eight years-even

longer for those who knew about all this FTPing, gophering and such back in the "old days."

If your library will never ever buy an electronic

journal before you retire, and you load the GPO records, via Marcive, OCLC or whoever, you may be receiving cataloging records with URLs. What is the location code? How will they show up in your OPAC? Will you say: well, this is just something that we are not going to deal with at our library, we'll just delete those that have that nasty 856 field. And then your patron may walk up to your OPAC terminal and see that you have the Census of Population from 1 790-1 990, but they are looking for the Census of 2000.

If your patron doesn't ask the right person, they

are going fill out an interlibrary loan request or

drive downstate because they "know" that the

University of Illinois has everything and

Northwestern doesn't have diddley. Because,

the patron may not "know" it's only on the

Internet and they are just going to assume that your library doesn't have it, just like all those

other documents prior to July 1976. Even if your library is not buying the GPO tapes, your

collection is migrating to the Internet and your

patron may find those URL records on the

SilverPlatter CD and ask you what it means.

See the Administrative Notes Technical Supplements or the University of Memphis

Migrating Titles page <http://www.lib.

memphis.edu/gpo/mig.htm > for living proof. Or you may think: hey, I'm only a 1 57o

depository, this won't affect me. But, perhaps you are a full State depository. We just received notice that the Illinois Administrative Code from this edition forward will only be

available via CD-ROM.

The reason that Northwestern University (NU)

Library has developed a policy for

111
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

bibliographic access for electronic resources is not just because I keep forwarding to the Head

of Serials copies of statements from journals

that read: "last issue, available only on the WWW." (Although, I admit it did sort of push

enough buttons in Serials to make them realize

that this was going to be a problem since I wasn't going to leave them alone). The reason

that we are dealing with the issue is not just because of government publications. There were otherproblems in the Main Library:

1 . CDs/Floppies that accompany books: Should they stay with the book?

Should they circulate? How do we

mark the pieces? If they are not on the

Library LAN, Where should they be housed?

2. Journal subscriptions on the WWW:

How do we let people know that we

have an electronic version?

3. What about resources that we create at NU such as electronic text?

4. How do we catalog them? Separate

records? Every format in one

bibliographic record? What about

those materials that are available only

to the Northwestern Community due to

site licenses? Do we assign a call number?

As these questions were being asked and more

and more electronic resources continued to flow into our library (not just from the Federal Government), Northwestern's Assistant University Librarian (AUL) for Technical

Services formed a committee that became known as BAER (Bibliographic Access to Electronic Resources) in February 1996. (I give the AUL, Roxanne Sellberg, all credit for a

brilliant acronym). As Roxanne pointed out, she wanted to create a policy rather than a

tradition. The committee consisted of the AUL

and the Head of Bibliographic Records Service

(i.e., monographic cataloging) as co-chairs along with the Head of Serials Cataloging, the Transportation Library Cataloger, the Head of

the Science and Engineering Library, a main

library original cataloger who was the de facto electronic resources cataloger, the Reference

Electronic Resources Coordinator, and myself.

It is important to note that the committee was a library-wide committee and not just a technical

services committee. Because, as the Head of

Serials cataloging told me one day: "we don't

care where it goes, we just need to know

where it is going!" The very first time that BAER met, I was

excited: finally, we are going to deal with this migration of sources to the Internet! I pulled together my remarks from the Superintendent

of Documents and Gil Baldwin at the 1 996 ALA Mid-Winter GPO Updates regarding

migration and classification issues and Tad

Downing's updates from the Cataloging Branch as well as issues that had appeared on GOVDOC-L and one of the first examples of a cataloging record with a URL: The Federal

Bulletin Board. I had my pile (despite the

electronic world, a few trees still give their

lives for the electronic migration process) and was ready to talk. Then I realized: these non- government librarians were just now dealing

with issues that I have been dealing with since 1989. I was going to have to slow down. Be

patient. Bite my lip. Try not to say snide

things. One of the first questions of bibliographic access to electronic resources on the Internet had already been raised in the documents community as early as 1 993 (for the historians

in the audience: the first I found on the GOVDOC-L archive was on March 1, 1993 by

Cathy Dwyer at SUNY Albany and the only

response to her query that I found was from Duncan Aldrich at University of Nevada,

Reno). These people were just now trying to deal with the fact that all these CDs and

floppies were coming into the library. Do they

stay with the book? How do we mark the

pieces? Where do we put them? Do we

circulate them? I already had over a thousand CDs and floppies in my collection. What was

the big deal? But, in the non-documents

world, this is just now becoming a big deal.

112
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

We met every Tuesday from 9 to 1 1 a.m. Yes, every week, from February until December

1996. We had "testimony" from various

library departments as to what they wanted to see in the OPAC (e.g., Preservation, Media

Center, Social Sciences Data Services, Electronic Text). We gathered information from other institutions that were already

cataloging electronic resources (including the University of Virginia, the University of Michigan, and Florida State University). In March 1996, I made a call on GOVDOC-L

asking if anyone wanted to get together for an

"informal" discussion of BAER issues. Some of you may have been one of the seventy-five

that showed up in April during the 1996

Conference. You may be surprised to hear that when I reported back that all these government documents types showed up to this informal

discussion, that the NU BAER committee was

surprised that so many of us "non-cataloging"

types would be interested in the issue. I explained it is a documents librarian tradition to make technical service nightmares come

true.

I gave them a copy of the GPO Cataloging Guidelines from the WWW. A few were

pleased and surprised that GPO already had developed a policy and actual implemented

procedures. I pointed out that the GPO had to create a policy because while the subject bibliographers may pick and choose what

electronic products they want to buy, the GPO

has to take whatever format they receive from

the agencies. So, if things are now on the

Internet, there is an expectation and

requirement that the GPO will provide

bibliographic access from those of us in Federal Depository Library Land. In fact, we

are pretty vocal about our expectations to catalog and classify the materials. And, the loudest voices were not just from the government documents librarians who are

catalogers.

I will spare you a blow by blow about the

details of these meetings. Our final report is available on the WWW < http://www. library. nwu.edu/tech/baer/> . It's interesting to note

that in the very beginning, the committee

could not even agree on "the vision thing."

Part of the group felt that the OPAC would

continue to be the primary source for all types

of materials. Others in the group felt that the

Internet would be the starting point for all sources and that the OPAC would be a secondary tool where users would locate books and other non-Internet resources. One

thing we did agree upon: that as fast as the technology is changing, the next few years will be a transition period. I refer to it as the-never- ending-BAER-committee.

Things we did agree to implement for Internet:

1 . For those items that migrate to the Web

and retain their same titles, information

will be recorded in the bibliographic

record, just as GPO uses the same

record for microfiche, paper, and

electronic.

Score one for the Documents

Librarians who like one record. Again,

traditional cataloging at NU creates a separate record for microfiche, print, and electronic publications. But, in the world of "shrinking technical services resources" (read: staff), there is a need

to streamline. For many years, the Government Publications Department

has added a second copy holding on

the same record for different formats.

2. For titles that are available on the

Internet, we have created a series of location codes for our NOTIS system:

govt, int afri,int ref,int

All these codes will display the

location: INTERNET

The theory behind having departments

identified in the staff mode is that if the URL

goes "bad". Cataloging will have a "responsible" department to find a new one or

to have the record suppressed. If you look at GPO Cataloging Guidelines, they actually 113
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

have a section entitled "remote files no longer

available" (i.e., dead URLs).

3. URLs will be recorded in the 856 field, which displays in the notes area, and

they will be labeled: "Access method."

4. In the call number field, the message

will read: "See URL above."

5. For holdings, there will be an 852 field displayed which says: "See Internet for available issues." Now, these seem like simple, obvious

solutions. However, if you get involved in such a project, you will find that everyone has an opinion and we all feel that ours is the right one! And there will be major arguments and arm wrestling over words: is it better to have INTERNET or WWW or World Wide Web?

Should the message say: See URL above or See URL in notes above or See WWW address above? Another part of the NUL BAER dealt with

issues for tangible electronic resources (e.g., CD-ROMs and floppies). We recommended

creation of location codes for electronic products such as:

ref, elec which will display in the OPAC:

Main Reference (Electronic).

Prior to this, CDs in the Reference Department would be either Reference or Reference Desk

(depending on when it arrived and/or who

assigned the location code in Reference). And

if the patron didn't notice that the Dewey

number was for an electronic product and

didn't stop at the desk, they could spend a

couple of hours looking through the Reference

stacks and think perhaps it was on the reshelving stacks. Naturally, we have used a

govt,elec location code for at least four years. Of course, we could have the same stack search if our patron has only provided us a SuDocs number.

So, where are we at Northwestern University

Library Government Publications and Maps

Department in providing bibliographic access

to electronic products? To borrow a new

phrase that is floating around in cataloging

circles: we have a "virtual backlog." We have

procedures in place and have begun using the new location codes for titles that have

migrated to electronic only access. But, at this point, my department is cleaning up the Marcive tape loads. See, you are not behind: we may have invented NOTIS in 1970, but we

are now on tape 5 of the 8 tapes ranging from

July 1976 to 1995. And we are "ready" for when our current tape load begins for those

electronic products with the URL in the 856

field. As the first speaker for this session, I just wanted to remind you how much you already know about bibliographic access to electronic resources just by virtue of being government

information specialists. And I encourage you

not to think that "you don't know nothing about birthing no bib records." So, when you

hear Carol, Barbie, and Arlene speak about how they do good at their institution, don't

think that you are behind-just remember: most

libraries haven't done that pre-July 1 976 recon

of their collections. And use what skills you

already have to move your library toward

providing access to electronic resources. And

if your library won't go, you can at least move

your government documents forward.
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

Bibliographic Access to Government Information

Carol Bednar

California State University, Fullerton

Fuiierton, CA

At the 1 993 Chicago Conference on the Future

of Government Information, the admonition

given to speakers was, "Don't talk long, but

say something." That is what I hope to do

today.

In the area of bibliographic control of electronic information resources two major

questions arise:

• Can this new format fit into old modes

of access control?

• Should it?

I do not have to tell you that this is a time of

transition. One year ago GPO had no links to Internet resources on their cataloging records. Today there are more than 1 700.

Bibliographic control of electronic Government information is a relatively new

problem, or opportunity. To emphasize the newness of access, think about changes in your own library. How long has your library had its online catalog? Although it seems as if we have had ours for at least fifteen years, Cal

State Fullerton actually came up with an online

catalog in December of 1989-just 7 short years ago. We have dealt with profound

changes in a very short period of time. And

there is no reason to think that there is going to be any let up in the pace of change in the near

future.

But, let's get back to the original questions. I think GPO has provided a very creative and

responsible answer to the questions. The

answer to the first question, "Can this new

format fit into old modes of access control?" is "probably yes." With some adaptations of

MARC records, we can take the regular cataloging rules, add some new fields, and

provide a reassuringly familiar access to electronic resources. The answer to the second question, "Should it?" is, "We're not

entirely sure, so let's experiment with different ways of providing access to electronic resources and see which ones work best."

This attitude is reflected in Pathway Services. As GPO says, "Pathway Services is a suite of

tools being developed by the Federal Depository Library Program to direct librarians and the public to Federal Government

information on the Internet." "Being

developed" is a key phrase here-an honest one and I think an optimistic one. This reflects the attitude that "we are not sure what access

tools users need right now; we will try several

(not just one). We will continue to develop them and add news ones if necessary." The newly expanded Pathway Services can be found on the Internet through the Superintendent of Documents home page and

the Federal Depository Library Program home

page. Pathway Services currently consists of

five very different tools for accessing Government information. The first is "Search a Comprehensive Catalog

of Government Information Products (MoCat)" which provides access to cataloging records published in MoCat since January 1994. It is updated daily with preliminary cataloging

records that will be edited and published in future issues of MoCat. This catalog allows the patron to determine what depository library closest to him has the publication he is trying

to locate. Determination is made by state and

telephone area code. (This will make us think

115
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

about what we weed!) Actually GPO has taken this problem into consideration and

plans to keep only the latest five years worth of records in the MoCat. The MoCat currently contains over 1 700 hot links to Government

information on the Internet. The second is "Browse Government Internet

Sites by Topic." This provides links to Government produced home pages. The

topics are the'same that are used in the Subject

Bibliography series. This provides a nice continuity for users or librarians with long memories. "Browse Electronic Government

Information Products by Title" is arranged by agency and takes you to specific titles, not just home pages. "Search for Government

Information on Selected Internet Sites (Pathway

Indexer)" provides for users who want to put in a term and see what pops up.

Finally, "Search the Government Information Locator Service (GILS)" is a "decentralized

collection of agency-based information

locators using network technology and

international standards to direct users to relevant information resources within the Federal Government." The Pathway GILS

records are agency-produced links to their own

information sites. We can see from the five Pathway Services that GPO recognizes the fact that there is no one best way to access Government information in electronic format.

I find this heartening. It's just not that simple. Pathway Services demonstrates GPO's

approach to providing bibliographic access to Government information. But, how does all this relate to what we do in our own libraries? Just as we did not think it enough to hand a patron a copy of the Monthly Catalog to find Government publications located in our

library, we believe we need to integrate records for Government Internet resources into our own local systems. But providing access

to electronic products is not quite the same as providing access to our paper holdings. To

answer the question, "Should we add records

for Internet resources to our Library's OPAC?"

you need to ask, "what is our concept of our

online catalog? Is it a guide to what our library

owns or a guide to resources for our patrons? What is the concept of our library's home page and what resources should be linked from it?"

If you decide to add records to your local online catalog for Internet resources, there are some important issues to address. At the Depository Library Council meeting in Salt Lake City in October 1996, a cataloger asked

the question "How will the catalogers know

what Internet resources to catalog?" The

answer is one that is vital to understand. Adding Internet resources to your OPAC is not only a cataloging decision. It is a collection development decision, a public services decision, and a resource allocation decision. The cataloger cannot decide in isolation. As a first step, you may find that Government

information resources provide the catalyst for your library to come to terms with the question

of whether to add records for Internet resources into the local catalog. If a library has always received the Current Industrial Reports, don't we need to reflect in our online catalog not only that the publication is no longer being

printed, and that it is currently available on the

Internet but also where on the Internet the user can find the publication? I think the answer is unquestionably yes. If you agree, then you

will want to put cataloging records for Internet resources into your online catalog. You

should start Internet cataloging with those

resources that are the most beneficial to your

patrons. You will also need to think carefully about

technical details that need to be worked out. As with any departure from standard practice, you want to be able to collect all of these new

records easily and quickly in the event changes need to be made in the future. At our

library, we are adding a series note of "Internet Resource" to the record for each Internet resource we catalog. This will allow easy

collection in the future. Once you are committed to cataloging Internet resources, you need to find URLs. There are many ways to locate them. First, you can rely on GPO. There are currently over 1 700

116
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

records in MoCat which include URLs, and GPO will continue to catalog electronic Government information in the future. Second, URLs sometimes appear on the front or back cover of publications-we always check them! Third, you can browse the

Internet, and use the Pathway Services tools to locate materials. Once you make the commitment, you will find yourself faced with

interesting questions. I get about two per week like this from our cataloger.

1) Do we catalog Internet resources for items we did not select in paper? (Answer-Maybe. Although we have

never selected the Davis-Bacon General Wage Determinations, if a free Internet site existed for it, I would sure add the cataloging record to our OPAC.)

2) If our catalog record says "keep latest edition only," do we discard the last paper issue we have? This one gave me pause.

serial and provide no link to the electronic

version. Or do we want to rely solely on a home page link to a current electronic serial that provides no indication that our library holds the previous issues in paper? I don't

think so.

I would like to close with some words from

Erik Jul, the Manager of the Internet cataloging

project for OCLC. Erik is a wonderful speaker.

If you have the chance to hear him, I urge you

to take advantage of the opportunity. He

brings logic to illogical situations, order to chaos, and generally leaves his audience

feeling more optimistic about the future than

they were before they heard him speak. Erik's advice is "We need despair only if we think cataloging will not change. The applications

of computer automation to library functions is far from over. Tomorrow's best solutions will merge from a deep understanding of today's

strengths and weakness." And my favorite, "There are really only two mistakes we can make: Thinking that cataloging is the solution; thinking that it is not."

^

Even though the questions are difficult, the

alternative is not appealing. If you meet

resistance in your library to the idea of cataloging Government Internet resources, just bring up the question of serials. Do we really want to leave our patrons with the impression

that they can no longer access the Current

Industrial Reports? This is what will happen if we close the cataloging record for the paper

1 . Eric Jul. "Why Catalog Internet Resources?" Computers in Libraries 16 (Jan. 1996): 8

117
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

Bibliographic Control in an Electronic FDLP:

Problems, Practices and Policies

Barbara Selby

University of Virginia

Cliarlottesviiie, VA

The title of our program is Bibliographic Control in an Electronic FDLP: Problems,

Practices and Policies. I would add "promises"

to the title of my portion of this program. I think there is a great deal of promise in what we heard this morning from the GPO staff about the URLs they are adding to records. I also think that the "single record" approach

described by Jean Hirons to cataloging Internet materials which are also available in paper is an especially good approach to this material. What I plan to do in the next 1 0 to 1 5 minutes

is describe the situation at my library (the University of Virginia (UVA), a regional) in reference to our online catalog and cataloging

electronic materials, especially Government

materials. A bit of background on the UVA Library system: We're a large research library: our last milestone was our 4 millionth volume. We are also heavily involved in making information

available electronically. We have six electronic centers: the Social Sciences Data

Center, the Geographic Information Center

(both of which are administratively a part of the Government Information Resources

Section) the Digital Image Center, the Digital Media and Music Center, the Electronic Text

Center, and the Special Collections Digital Center. Our library is committed to making the

electronic information we produce available

via our online catalog. In preparing for this talk I read papers which have been presented

at other conferences by our catalogers, Jackie Shieh and Allison Sleeman, just to give you an

idea of how expert our cataloging department

is in this area. I don't make any claims to expertise myself, but I do claim to come from a

library that's cutting (bleeding) edge in its electronic access to information. Now for a little background on the Government Information Resources Section of the UVA Library and our online cataloging

efforts. We've been Marcive customers since 1990 when we brought up our NOTIS online

catalog. Because we are a regional we have

always subscribed to the entire GPO tape file. When we were a NOTIS library we excluded any records which were corrections to older GPO records. In our NOTIS catalog we did not have the ability to automatically overlay

records. Subscribing to all new GPO records has its problems. We still have records in our

catalog for materials we never received, but

are working to delete the records or acquire

the material. But we also received records for

serials which GPO cataloged as a part of its CONSER activities (I think) like Foreign

Relations of the United States, and the U.S. Government Manual. We simply don't have

the staff to catalog these important titles (and many more) retrospectively, but GPO's

mandate is to do this, which benefits many

libraries.

This past summer we switched from NOTIS to SIRSI as our online catalog vendor. With SIRSI we now do have the ability to automatically

overlay records. We also have the ability to

118
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

simply click on a URL in a record and link to the Internet. At the same time we made the online catalog switch we also began receiving the Marcive shipping list records.

Additionally, we asked to receive ALL GPO

records, including changes to earlier records. The theory is that the changed GPO records

will simply overlay the previous record and be

better and more complete. So we made three big changes at one time. We of course realized that things might not go

completely smoothly. They haven't. We have had some problems and are still having some problems with getting the overlay process to work properly. However, we feel confident that we will work out those problems fairly soon.

Here's where I come to the "Promises" section of my talk. I think that, for our library, the overlay capabilities of our SIRS! system and the cataloging practices of GPO together offer an

opportunity to provide much better access to Government information in our library. However, I will be the first to say that we are

just beginning with this overlay process and

are still fine-tuning it. We hope that it will work in the long run, but still have a long way

to go before we are sure that it will work. As I said, we are now receiving all GPO

cataloging records, both new records and

corrections to previous records for both monographs and serials. These updated or corrected records obviously include the records to which GPO has added URLs. Since GPO is already making great efforts to keep up

with new and changing URLs for much

Government information, it seemed redundant

for us to try to do this too. We would much

rather take advantage of all of GPO's fine work

in this area than actually do the work

ourselves! To date GPO has added about 1 700 URLs to

its records. Our library's catalog should have

almost all of these in our records. Such keyword searches as the following return

records for materials which are on the WWW

and have clickable links in the cataloging

records:

Internet and agriculture

Internet and (government adj manual)

Internet and (elderly or aging) Problems that we will have to work to overcome include:

1 ) Replacing of records means that almost

all information added to the record would be lost: is that acceptable or

not? It would mean that we would

essentially never modify our documents records and would count on GPO to make whatever

modifications were needed.

2) What about the problem of getting records for periodicals and serials from

Marcive? Will we get too many

records which need to be deleted from

our catalog?

3) What about "availability" records from GPO? Do we want to continue to get these?

4) Will GPO continue to track URLs?

5) What about agency URLs that GPO

doesn't add? Should we add them, knowing that at any load of records our work might be erased by a revision of the record that may or may not contain

the information we added?

6) What about other records our library adds to its catalog which might be

inadvertently overlaid by a GPO record

for the same title? A final aspect of our library's cataloging of Government information on the Internet is our

cataloging of the value added information which our electronic centers produce. As I mentioned, both our Social Sciences Data

Center (SSDC) and the Geographic Information Center (GIC) are administratively located in the 119
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

Government Information Resources section of the library. Both of these centers utilize Government produced information and enhance it by making it available via forms on

the WWW or by combining it with commercially available software. Our

cataloging department has been and will continue to catalog such WWW resources as the Virginia Digital Map Library and the value added versionj)f the Regional Economic

Information System. The SSDC and GIG will continue to use Government information as the basis for much of their work on the Web. Our cataloging department will continue to provide access to this value added Government information via VIRGO, our

online catalog. It strikes me that this is an example of the Government/depository library partnership which we have heard about.

120
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

Bibliographic Control in an Electronic FDLP:

Problems, Practices, and Policies

Arlene Weible

Willamette University Salem, OR

What I'd like to do today is give you a broad overview of what we are doing at Willamette

University to add URLs to our online catalog. I don't have enough time to cover everything,

so please feel free to ask questions later, either personally, or via e-mail. I should also point out that most of our procedures regarding adding URLs to catalog records are posted on

our Technical Services Home Page, and the address is listed at the end of this paper. Let me start by giving you a brief history of the cataloging of Government documents at my

institution. The Mark O. Hatfield Library at Willamette

University is a selective depository, selecting approximately 20 percent of items available. For a variety of reasons, we decided against using a catalog record tapeloading service, such as Marcive. In January 1996, we began

to catalog all currently received Government

documents, working them into our regular cataloging workflow. Our documents assistant received training in copy cataloging using OCLC, with additional help provided by the

library's regular copy cataloger. We have

selectively cataloged older documents as demand and time allows, but the primary focus

of cataloging activities has been current

receipts. Around the same time that the decision was made to catalog documents, the library purchased the Web-based version of the Innovative Interfaces catalog. One of the most

exciting features of the Web-based catalog was

the ability to link bibliographic records to URLs on the Internet through use of the MARC

field 856. Given my position as both the

serials cataloger and Government documents

librarian at my institution, I recognized that Government documents offered a good testing ground for this new linking technology. And,

given the fact that we were cataloging many

documents for the first time, the opportunity to add additional fields to catalog records fit well with our workflow.

I started with doing a little research. After reading up on national standards for using the 856 field in bibliographic records, I realized

that at that time there was little consensus on how this new field should be implemented.

Knowing how long it can take to reach consensus about standards at the national

level, and with the tentative blessing of our head of Technical Services, I decided to forge ahead and develop my own standards for our

library's catalog. I'm fortunate to be at a small

institution, where I didn't need to convene a committee to formulate policy. I just started experimenting with a few records. The idea was that I could easily undo the work if my

own decisions conflicted with national

standards. Besides, being a native of Beaverton, Oregon, the home of Nike, has also made me a firm believer in the phrase "Just Do

It!" One of the first decisions made was to focus on Internet sources that had print equivalents. This meant adding 856 fields to the print version's record, and not create new records

for each electronic version. At the time, this was a violation of the national standards

regarding multiple formats, but I was able to

121
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

justify my action by assuring my boss that the

national standards would soon be more

flexible. Luckily, I was right. Using one

bibliographic record to link print and

electronic formats, or what is known as the

"single record option," is now an acceptable

practice sanctioned by CONSER. And now,

the most prominent users of this option are the cataloging staff at GPO.

The next decis^ion made was how much

information would be added to the bibliographic records, and how it would be

formatted. Given that we had not yet implemented the Web-based catalog, we

needed to find a way that made sense in both

the text and Web version. I've tried to pick out

a number of titles for examples that represent

different situations. National Water Conditions

illustrates the basic format on which we have

settled. Viewing the MARC display of the

record, please notice the 580 note field. We

record Internet availability, the date the URL

was last checked, and the actual URL. We've

tried to standardize the notes as much as possible, but also allow flexibility when

needed. In the 856 field, we use a standard note in the subfield z, in this case "View

current issues via the Internet." This becomes

the text of the link in the regular public

display.

Let me say a few words about the note fields. We use the note field to display URL

information because it allows more clarity in the public display than the 856 field in our

text-based catalog. It also allows us to record

the date that the URL was last known to be

functioning. Since we simply don't have the

staff time to keep URLs up to date as much as we would like, adding the date gives us some

information if we find that the link is not working. Unlike many of my colleagues, the

possibility of having outdated URLs in catalog records doesn't bother me that much. I guess

I'm gambling again, this time on technology. I assume that library catalog systems will progress to the point where keeping URL links current will become an automated process. In the meantime, we occasionally run reports that

pull together all the URLs in the catalog, and

use Web-X-Ref, a link checking software, to

identify changed or dead URLs. More

information about our procedures can be found on our library's Technical Services Web

page. The main point is that we didn't let the

possibility of dead links in the catalog keep us from adding them in the first place.

Yet another decision made was not to include any holdings information for the Internet source. In the Innovative system, this means

no addition of item or check-in records. The

reasoning behind this decision is that the

ability of our library to "hold" an Internet source is tenuous at best. We have no plans to archive Web sites, either now or in the future. We simply don't have the resources to do so. Another influencing factor was that holdings

records would increase the amount of labor needed to keep the records accurate. For example, those of you who have worked with documents know that the concept of predictive check-in, the basis for many serials control systems, is tough to apply given depository

distribution patterns. Trying to apply

predictive check-in to the update schedules of Government Internet sources is simply, in my

opinion, a fruitless endeavor.

So, what began as an experiment on a few

records has grown to the addition of over 350 URLs in our catalog. I wish I could tell you

that I've established a systematic process for identifying and adding URLs, but this is simply

not the case. I add URLs when I see messages on GOVDOC-L, when I run across a Web site when answering a reference question, and when our documents assistant finds one

printed on the publication. GPO's work on

adding URLs to records has also accounted for the increase in our own catalog. While we still need to edit the records to accommodate our own standards, it is still extremely helpful to have this information identified by GPO, and

I'd like to urge them to continue their current

practices. As for ongoing problems, one of the most

difficult is establishing criteria for when to include a URL in a record. At the end of this paper, I've listed some sample criteria to help 122
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

in this decision. Unfortunately, I've had

trouble applying this criteria in a systematic way. For example, making the decision to link a record to a Web site that is not an exact

duplicate of the printed publication requires a

lot of intuition and judgment. While it would

be easier to restrict links only to exact

duplicates, I'm not sure this is in the best

interest of library patrons.

Also, developing standards for cataloging purely Internet sources has been a challenge. While I've cataloged a few sites, such as STAT- USA, the need to expand this type of cataloging is increasing, given that there are many Government Internet sources with no

printed equivalents. A commitment to cataloging Internet sites has huge implications

for labor and workflow, and also has the

potential to redefine what we mean by the

library's catalog. Needless to say, we have yet

to fully work out these issues at our institution. The final question is, does all this work benefit anyone? This has been difficult to measure at Willamette. We have only fully implemented

the Web-based catalog this spring, so we

haven't gotten much feedback from library users. Our reference librarians find it very

helpful, and given the number of inquiries I've received, I think librarians from around the country also find it useful. What I hope,

though, is that I will be able to report back at future conferences that our library users are making use of the information. As a final word, I'd like to encourage each and

every one of you to take the plunge and start adding URLs to your library catalogs. You

don't have to be at a large research library. In fact, it may be easier to begin this task at a smaller institution, where policy and decision making tend to be less hierarchical and

bureaucratic. To get started, talk to your

catalogers. They may be looking for examples

to experiment with, and documents librarians can certainly provide ample fodder. Remember also that you don't need to have a Web-based catalog to gain the benefits from

this information. Putting URLs in a note field that displays in a text-based system still provides information to library patrons. Also,

if you code URLs in an 856 field now, you can

prepare for a time when you may have an

opportunity to implement a Web-based

system. Resources

Willamette University's Mark O. Hatfield

Library

• Web version of Library's catalog

http://nemesis.willamette.edu/wulib

(frames)

http://l ibrary .wi I lamette.ed u/screens/ opacmenu.html (non-frames)

• Technical Services Home Page - Current

policies and procedures

http://nemesis.willamette.edu/techserv/ Sample Criteria For Adding URLS To The

Bibliographic Records of Government

Publications

• URL is easily identified and verified

Printed on publication Provided by GPO

URL leads to exact publication

• URL provides more current information than print version

Print publication has ceased and

information is only available on the

Internet Internet site provides up to date

information Update frequency of information can be determined Web information may not exactly duplicate print version

123
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

• Information on the Internet has been

publicized and patron demand is anticipated

Internet site has been publicized in the media

Internet site contains information of current and/or lasting interest to

library's patrons

124
7997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

LC/GfilM's Scanning Program: Where We Are

and How We Got Here

Elizabeth Mangan

Library of Congress Washington, DC

When the staff of the Geography and Map

Division (G&M) at the Library of Congress (LC) began assessing how digital forms of geographic and cartographic information could be integrated into its collections, we realized the new technologies would require knowledge and skills that we did not possess.

It was also clear that the complex and

expensive array of computer equipment that was required would be difficult, if not

impossible, to acquire through the normal

budgetary channels for appropriated funds.

In November 1993 the James Madison

Council, a private sector advisory group to the

Library, provided $30,000 to investigate the establishment of a corporate support group for the G&M Division. That same month, Alan M.

Voorhees, a long-time friend and supporter of the Geography and Map Division and the

Library, volunteered to lead the effort in attracting industry support. The first meeting of this corporate support

group, which was named the Center for Geographic Information, was held at the

Library on January 12th, 1995, when eight

firms committed to being charter members:

Autometric, Inc., Environmental Systems

Research Institute, Hansard Design and Mapping Company, H.M. Gousha Company,

Intergraph Federal Systems, MAGELLAN

Geographix, Maplnfo Corporation, and

Tangent Engineering. Mr. Voorhees, who is chairman of the board of Autometric, a firm engaged in many aspects of the latest geographic technologies, agreed to be chairman of the Center for Geographic

Information.

The purpose of the Center is to coordinate the

contribution of various resources and knowledge from a wide spectrum of the geographic information and cartography

industry. These donations will:

1 . Assist the Geography and Map Division in making the transition to the age of electronic maps and digital forms of geographic information through advice,

training, and financial support for acquiring hardware, software, and data

sets;

2. Facilitate sharing the rich cartographic

resources of the Division electronically;

3. Promote the use of electronic forms of geographic information by many sectors of the nation, including libraries, academia,

industry and commerce, education, and

the general public;

4. Encourage the deposit of digital spatial data sets by American and foreign governments, industry, and academic

producers; and

5. Advance the library's publication, education, and exhibition programs in geographic information and cartography. The charter members of the Center established

full membership at $5,000 annually and

associate membership at $500 annually. Support from industry members also includes

in-kind assistance, as necessary, in providing

the Division with appropriate equipment and

software to begin developing expertise in the

125
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

scanning of maps and the use of software and

digital forms of geographic data; deposit of data sets; and participation on committees to accomplish the goals of the Center. Members of the Center benefit in a number of ways:

1 . The Division's expertise in cataloging

cartographic materials is shared with developers and users of digital forms of geographic information;

2. Because of its unique position within the

Library, the Center can sponsor programs

that address specific needs of the cartographic and geographic information communities and provide useful links among these communities and with Congress and other institutions;

3. By working with producers and users of geographic information and digital cartography the Division can ensure that

digital forms of geographic information are systematically collected and preserved for the future use of the nation; and,

4. Most importantly, members have enhanced access to the Library's vast collections of cartographic materials, which they are encouraged to use as resource material and to distribute in a

variety of value-added formats.

For those of you who might not know, the

Library of Congress collection of cartographic

materials is the largest in the world, containing

approximately 4.6 million maps; more than 60,000 atlases, which contain another 8 to 10

million maps; approximately 300 globes; as well as relief models, puzzles, fans, powder

horns, and almost anything else that might have a map on it. In the early 1990s, digital

files of geographic data began appearing among cartographic materials deposited by

Federal mapping agencies and cartographic software through copyright deposits. The

Division's collections now contain approximately 4,000 CDs and computer

software packages which are controlled in an

online ProCite database restricted to Division

staff. The Center for Geographic Information has met five times since the organizational meeting

in January 1 995: June 1 995 at the Library; October 1995 at MAGELLAN Geographix in Santa Barbara, California; May 1996, back at the Library; September 1996 in Bellevue, Washington, sponsored by Corbis; and January 1997 in Denver, Colorado, sponsored by

Tangent. As of the first of April the Center's membership

has grown to 14 members and 10 associate members. The new members are Autodesk,

Inc., Corbis Corporation, Digicolor, Inc., the Hewlett-Packard Company, LizardTech, Inc., Microsoft Corporation, Mindscape, Inc., Rand

McNally and Company, and Tactician Corporation. The new associate members are ADC The Map People, CommuniVision,

EDR/Sanborn, Inc., Adrian B. Ettlinger, Macromedia, Inc., MapLink, Inc., Navigator

Publishing, Spatial Data Institute, and Systems

Planning and Analysis

We have made great strides in moving into the new world of digital geographic information in the last three and a half years, largely because

of the efforts of our staff and their success in convincing private sector companies that they have a lot to gain by becoming involved in this enterprise. Direct cash contributions to the Center total approximately $100,000, and the value of hardware and software contributed to date is over $700,000. The first meeting resulted in the first donation. Robert Garber, Chief Operating Officer of Tangent Engineering, now Tangent Color

Systems, spearheaded the indefinite loan of a

large-format, flatbed, color scanner, a Sun

Sparc workstation, and a Hewlett Packard 650

plotter. This system can scan flat items up to 24 by 34 inches, in 24-bit color, at resolutions up to 600 dots per inch (dpi). Of course the

plotter only prints at 300 dpi. As a result of this donation, we acquired the technology to scan maps, and the library's

126
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

overall National Digital Library Program (NDLP) adopted our proposal to establish a National Digital Library (NDL) Program for Cartographic Materials, which it has agreed to support through the funding of four positions

in the Division to run the scanning program.

In a ceremony in the division in April 1995,

Dr. Billington, the Librarian of Congress, and

John Kluge, President of the James Madison

Council, cut the ribbon on the scanner and

participated in the scanning of the first image

from the Library's cartographic collections, George Washington's A plan of my farm on

Little Huntg. Creek & Potomk, which the first President drew in 1 776. The result is so fine that it is difficult to distinguish the scanned map from the original manuscript.

During the first year after the scanner was

installed, we scanned several hundred maps in a trial or testing phase and have been working

with the members of the Center on technical standards and workflow design in preparation

for large-scale scanning projects for the NDL.

Shortly after the donation of the scanning

system, the Hewlett Packard (HP) Company

made a major donation to the Division and we

found ourselves in the enviable position of having the full infrastructure necessary to accomplish our long-range goals. With the HP

donation of computer equipment worth nearly $600,000, the Center for Geographic

Information and the Division's related GIS

Facility both took a giant leap forward. During a reception in May 1 996 to thank

Hewlett-Packard for its generous donation in support of the Library's NDL Program for Cartographic Materials, Dr. Billington remarked on the importance of this gift. He

observed that, "In helping the Geography and Map Division adapt to the modern world of geography and cartography, the executives of HP who made this donation possible have also embellished the vision of their company's

co-founder, David Packard," adding that the NDL Program was started with $13 million in seed money of which $5 million was from the

Lucille and David Packard Foundation.

In preparation for the installation of this new

equipment, the Division's Reading Room was

re-configured to construct a secured area to house the servers and optical storage jukebox

as well as the scanning equipment. Access to

this area is restricted to selected staff members

through the use of a swipe card system to unlock the doors. Additionally, an alarm

system with both motion and infrared-heat detectors is used to secure the area when we

are closed. The HP donation will assist in the development of the Division's GIS Facility as well as its NDLP scanning effort. It consists of a Series 9000, K400 Server, featuring four 100 MHZ processors, 1.2Gb system memory, 8Gb

internal hard-drive, running HP/UNIX and a SureStore 1 65ST optical disk jukebox,

featuring slots for 128 Write-Once-Read-Many

(WORM) or Rewriteable optical disks for a

total of 1 65Gb of storage. HP also donated

three 712/100 workstations, featuring 100 MHZ, PA-RISC processors and 1 92Mb of system memory, running HP/UNIX and a Series 9000 J-200 workstation, featuring two

100 MHZ processors, 256Mb RAM, 2Gb

hard-drive, and special graphics enhancement,

to replace the Sun Sparc workstation on loan from Tangent for the NDL Program. Recognizing our need for equipment to provide access to the digital images created for the NDLP and to allow patrons to use Geographic Information Systems, HP donated

three HP Vectra PCs, featuring 120 MHZ

processors, running Windows95; three HP

Pavillion PCs, featuring 166 MHZ processors and full multi-media capabilities, running

Windows95; three Envisex P Series X-Window

Stations; a 715/100 workstation, featuring a 100 MHZ, PA-RISC processor, 256Mb of system memory, and an enhanced graphics

display, running HP/UNIX; two DeskJet

1 600CM color printers; a LaserJet 4MV, 1

1 " x 17" printer, and a DesignJet 755C, 36" roll feed, color plotter, with 72Mb of memory.

Following the installation of the equipment we

were able to appoint the remainder of our NDL team. We now have five full-time staff

127
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference members responsible for creating digital Images, a Processing Technician, two Digital Conversion Specialists, a Digital Conversion

Coordinator for Production, and a Digital Conversion Coordinator for Systems, who also serves as our WebMaster.

Ten core historic Americana aggregations from

the Division's collections have been

designated to be scanned for the National

Digital Library^Program. These include Civil War maps, county land ownership maps and

atlases, late 19th and early 20th century panoramic maps of U.S. cities, Sanborn fire insurance maps, and maps and atlases of the

District of Columbia. During the first year after the arrival of the scanner we tested the scanning of a variety of materials from the

collections, and even though most all of the items scanned have been done as on-demand

requests, we have been able to scan examples

from most of the aggregates designated for the NDLP. You have probably noticed that I have been

using the word "scanning" rather than

"digitizing" in describing these activities. The

Division is heedful of this distinction because

the images we are creating are raster images

that have not been geo-referenced.

Since Tangent scanners had formerly only been used by the military for scanning current maps, the scanning of the Library's collections

is their first opportunity to have this equipment

used with older materials which present a whole new range of problems, including:

discoloration; scanning through MylarTM; atlas bindings which can't be flattened; brittle, disintegrating maps, to name just a few. The

handling of our valuable, rare, and often delicate items presents problems all of its own. Once these items are scanned we don't want

to expose them to the process unnecessarily. Unfortunately the scanner doesn't seem to understand this concern. While scanning the

Division's Agnese atlas the two lenses went

out of calibration, resulting in a mis-alignment on each image, which wasn't discovered until the entire atlas had been scanned! Tangent

has continued to work closely with us while

we are learning the scanning software and to make the necessary modifications to both the scanner and the software when problems arise and to upgrade the software when

improvements are made. The Scanning Committee of the Center for Geographic Information is advising us in setting up our NDL production of images. The

Committee was established during the Center's meeting last May to discuss the workflow and

technical issues concerning the images for the NDLP. The Committee has advised us to scan

at 300 dpi and to save the images in TIFF

format.

In establishing a production workflow we have

encountered a number of stumbling blocks in getting the equipment networked using the

Library's standard twisted-pair token ring network and processing the images in preparation for making them available on the Web. Moving the images around in this environment has proven problematic. Finding

software to manipulate and edit the images which is compatible with the HP/UNIX has been hopeless since most software of this type

is written primarily for Solaris/UNIX. When

we discovered that Claris had developed

Macintosh emulation software for HP/UNIX, we were confident that we would be able to use the Macintosh version of xRes on the workstations provided by HP. Macromedia, one of the Center's members, donated two

copies of xRes, the Macintosh version and the WindowsNT version. Unfortunately, we have been unable to successfully load the Claris emulation software. We have loaded the WindowsNT version of xRes on an Intergraph workstation which is on

loan to the Library for evaluation. Since this machine is located one floor above us, we

must ftp the image to the Intergraph machine

in order to perform quality review and

post-processing to rotate, crop, adjust brightness or contrast, and stitch together the TIFF images. Through working with these

large images, approximately 180Mb each, and

conferring with Macromedia, we have

determined that the ideal computer for this

128
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

task would be a single processor Pentium Pro,

at least 1 66 MHZ, with 500Mb of RAM,

graphic accelerator card, 21 inch monitor, and

an 8Gb hard-drive running WindowsNT; or, alternatively, a Macintosh 9600 PowerPC with

a 300 MHZ single processor. Following the xRes processing, the images are temporarily stored on HP Surestore jukebox

magnetic optical platters which can each store

1 .3Gb. We then compress the image, using a wavelet-based image compressor software

called Multi-Resolution Seamless Image

Database, or MrSID, which was developed by

LizardTech, another corporate partner in the Center for Geographic Information. This software integrates multiple resolutions of an image in a single file which means that when

users zoom in they get better and better resolution. Since MrSID stores the images in a seamless manner the user can zoom in and

out. A Netscape plug-in which will enable a user to pan, providing immediate access to any

portion of a large image as quickly and easily as another, is scheduled to be released in the next few months. Although MrSID is a "lossy" image

compressor, we can compress the image at a

ratio of nearly 22:1 and not experience any

loss of information, because MrSID keeps track of every pixel from every image. One of the unique features of this compression method is its ability to decompress only that portion of the image requested by the user, which means

that images of any size can be decompressed

by a user with as little as 1 Mb of RAM.

Additionally, MrSID builds on each successive

resolution by using data already decompressed

and loaded, so the user gets immediate access

to any location in the image at any resolution.

This software has four components:

• MrSID Compress, to compress images;

• MrSID Retrieve, to decompress MrSID files for use with other software;

• MrSID Viewer, a stand-alone application

for viewing MrSID files; and.

• MrSID Distributed Image Database Server

for Internet access to MrSID files. MrSID doesn't require any special hardware to operate. MrSID Retrieve and Viewer operate on any platform, MS Windows 3.1, 95, NT, and MacOS and requires about 1Mb of RAM.

MrSID Compress and Distributed Database

SePv'er operate in WindowsNT, UNIX, and MacOS and require 32Mb physical RAM plus enough storage for the original image and for the compressed file. Input files can be raw

data or in a number of popular raster formats

including TIFF. MrSID Viewer allows

exporting in MrSID compressed format and in non-MrSID formats. The first aggregate of items to be scanned as a G&M Division project is our collection of panoramic views. Following the listing of items in Panoramic Maps of Cities in the United States and Canada: A Checklist of Maps in the Collections of the Library of

Congress..., published in 1984, we have

completed Alabama through Minnesota.

Permission to include facsimiles and items for which we have a photographic reproduction from another institution will be sought, so that those items can be made available in electronic form. While we expect to include images of maps

from atlases in the NDLP, we have

encountered a number of problems with these. Even with access to a book scanner, the size and weight of many atlases would prohibit the use of this type of scanner. We have tested using a digital camera suspended above an

atlas in a book cradle, but the distortion inherent in the variable distance to the center

of the cameras lens, especially in the gutter, has thus far proven unsolvable.

In addition to the bibliographic data in the USMARC record, which will serve as the primary access to the images in the Library's system, we will be building a metadata

database using Paradox. The metadata

database will include non-bibliographic data, including the number of images required for each scanned map, the number of versions of

129
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

each image, the date the item was scanned,

the scanner used, the reason or project for which the item was scanned, etc. An unexpected benefit of our scanning program has been a new avenue for acquisitions. During the visit of the Madison

Council in May 1 995, the Chief of the Division was showing a facsimile of View of the University of Virginia, Charlottesville &

Monticello taken from Lewis Mountain which was drawn by Casimir Bohn and published by

E. Sasche & Co. in 1856 when Mr. Voorhees mentioned that he owned an original of this view. Mr. Voorhees said that he would donate

the original to the Library if he could have a

print from the scanned image to replace it, since it was hung in his hotel in Richmond. When a former staff member, who is extremely

knowledgeable in the history of cartography and printing, was visiting the hotel for a meeting and saw and examined the framed view he remarked, "I thought Al gave the

original to the Library." We have also created a number of plotted images to be presented by Dr. Billington as

gifts to Senators, Congressmen, and other

dignitaries, including a facsimile atlas which

will be presented to the Pope during a visit this month by the Madison Council to Rome.

The Division's home page is now available at <http://lcweb.loc.gov/rr/geogmap/gmpage.

html > and the images we have created will soon be accessible through our home page or the Library's American Memory home page.

130
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

Access and Preservation via Digital Surrogate for

Spatial Data

Mary Lynette Larsgaard

University of California Santa Barbara, CA

One of those problems of success in many

spatial-data collections is how to preserve

heavily used collections while at the same

time making these same collections available

for what appears to be an ever-increasing audience. This paper will range from work done in one specific spatial-data collection, to a consortial approach, to an overall view for georeferenced information, as seen from the viewpoint of the digital library. Access or Preservation - or Both? Some key thoughts in most map librarians' minds when they contemplate moving

hardcopy collections into digital form are:

• Who are my library's primary users- present and future-and what are their needs?

• What purposes and benefits does this project have?

• I don't want to have to have this work done again-but how can my library financially support preservation-level scanning?

• For maps, is what is needed access to the

printing separates, or is a digital picture, whose information layers cannot be

manipulated digitally, acceptable for the

users of this collection? The results of having asked these questions and come up with at least some of the answers

at the Map and Imagery Laboratory (MIL) are the topic of this paper.

MIL'S digital efforts are in three inter-related areas:

1 . Davidson Library;

2. University of California/Stanford Map

Librarians Group (UCSMLG); and

3. Alexandria Digital Library (ADL).

In actuality, these three areas are interrelated, since the Davidson Library administration is a strong supporter of MIL's participation in UCSMLG and of the Alexandria Digital Library, and since UCSMLG is considered a primary source of information-intermediary audience and evaluator, data, and metadata. Davidson Library The library administration has supported a comparison study of scanning of air photos, by

three different firms: Stokes Imaging, Luna Ltd., and TGS Technologies. The object of this study was to find out what would be an

optimal way to get MIL's 3,800,000 air photos

scanned, preferably as many as possible of them in time to form a part of the ADL

collections. As will be noted later, MIL

already had at this point a scanner which is being used mainly to scan air photos, but our

primary goal at the time of purchase of that scanner was mainly to have an inexpensive

data-ingest scanner for Alexandria research.

Prices per scan differed considerably from firm

to firm, varying directly with the size of the file generated by the scanning procedure (itself dependent on dpi and bit depth). A few points we found out very quickly.

Eight-bit depth is usually sufficient for general

131
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

use of air photos (although we have experimented and scanned some at 24-bit depth, and then decided the tradeoff of having

a file three times the size of an 8-bit file was

probably not justified for our general users), and 24-bit depth is appropriate for air photos. Our decision as to appropriate dpi level was made by eyeball, noting that an air-photo print scanned at 600 dpi gives the general user about what is available from the actual print. Neither 1 50 nor 300 dpi is sufficient. 600 dpi

is sufficient for many users, but how much

more detail is needed for very sophisticated

users and for archival purposes? Or, to put it another way, what is "enough" resolution? And the answer is, as always, that depends:

who are your users and what do they need to do with the information? Scanning to the size of the silver-halide grains (12 microns) in the film emulsion-which is appropriate for archival purposes-results in very large files. There is currently a scanner designed especially for scanning air photos (it even has a roll-film transport)-Lenzar's LENZPRO-which will scan to that level. It is also very fast, taking two minutes and eight seconds to scan a 9" x 9" air photo, resulting in an 800Mb file; it is intended for heavy-duty

production scanning, and thus is ideal from

MIL'S point of view-but the cost of $120,000 is not! Another decision is whether it is best to scan one's own materials, or to farm out the scanning. Once again, it depends: is this a one-shot deal, or will your library continue to do scanning over long periods of time; and

moreover, will you and affiliated institutions be doing scanning of so many items that economies of scale may be realized by

collaborative operations? This leads us to the next of MIL'S projects for digital access and

preservation.

University of California/Stanford Map

Librarians Group (UCSMLG)

The UCSMLG is a close-knit group that has been in existence since the mid-1970s. On

June 20, 1 996, the group held a meeting at

MIL. We had available to us a handout from a meeting held June 14, just a few days

previous, at the University of California at Berkeley libraries, that addressed the more

general question of digitization of all types of

library materials. This draft has subsequently gone to a second draft and we hope to see a

final version out sometime in the first half of the year.^ The criteria given in this draft handout, titled "Principles of Selection for Digitization," are:

• Meets current faculty and student

information needs;

• Offers economies of scale by benefiting many faculty and students (locally and

worldwide);

• Maintains local or consortial collection balance among disciplines, information

formats, and instructional and research

tools;

• Adds value over paper- or film-based copies in various ways (e.g., more timely

availability, more extensive content,

greater functionality, greater access, improved resource sharing due to the

ubiquity of digitized resources, increasing

usefulness of the total collection, etc.);

• justifies costs of digitization, including

archival maintenance and access costs for the library as well as for its users;

• Achieves the goals of conversion to digital form (e.g., publishing, archiving, replacing,

preserving);

• Meets criteria of copyright, fair use, and

other legal restrictions imposed on

intellectual property;

• Provides orderly access and navigation to and within the item or collection;

• Is accessible from all institutionally-supported computing

132
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

platforms and networked environments;

• Employs formats that follow industry standards and are fully documented;

• Platform-independent, available in a

multiplicity of formats;

• Originals difficult to use;

• Commitment made by library to preserve both originals and digital files;

• Possible to capture information adequately,

to enable the digital version at least to serve as a surrogate for the original, thereby reducing demand for (and thus wear and tear on) originals;

• Originals not damaged by the conversion

process;

• Losses of integrity of files caused by

migration of files minimal;

• Preservation problem already exists with

original (e.g., risk of damage or loss);

• Security needed for original;

• Of interest to funding agencies, and

• Originals have research value; etc. With this list in our hands, the group discussed what needed to be done, and as a result put together a first-step draft white paper^ (goals; procedures) and a list of items that most needed to be digitized (e.g., unique, heavily used collections at each library; items each

library uses heavily, such as historic U.S. Geological Survey topographic quadrangles of

California; etc.). The white paper is available

at: < http://alexandria.ucsb.edu/'can/er/ ucop3.htm >

.

Following is a list of some of the collections suggested for digitizing by the map libraries:

• Topographic survey [of the coasts of the United States] / U.S. Coast & Geodetic

Survey. Scale 1:5,000-1:80,000. 1851? G3700 svar.U5 Case B Library has: 256

sheets. Reports T-1 825-7, T-3653 NOTE: Scan Bay area 1:10,000 sheets. First geodetic survey of the coastline.

• Pacific Aerial Surveys. [Aerial photography,

Berkeley campus, 1994]. Scale [ca. 1:600] Oakland, CA : Hammon/JensenAVallen &

Associates, 1994. Map Room

G4364.B5:2U5A4 1994.P3 Case B Library

has: 22 col. photos. NO copyright.

• United States. National Ocean Service. [United States nautical charts]. Scales vary ; Mercator proj. Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration, National Ocean Service, [18-? Map Room

G3701.P5 svar.U51 Case B

NOTE: Scan all Bay area charts

1 849-present, perhaps at 20 year intervals. Useful for shoreline changes.

• Non-copyrighted Bay-area cities, i.e., pre-1946 copyright expired, maps,

especially Oakland, Berkeley, San

Francisco

• Index maps for maps and air photos

AMS/DMA index maps would be ideal, since most are small. (1 K-3K sheets?)

• All CA topographic quads (or maybe those

before a certain date, say 1950)(2K? sheets)

• County road maps from Caltrans. Maybe

consider digitizing one set for each decade?

• Maps of historical interest, including old

plat maps of Berkeley, maps that show the burned area of San Francisco after the 1906 earthquake, how the San Francisco

shoreline changed, county maps showing

California rancho boundaries, etc.

• Outline and base maps of all kinds (county

boundaries, hydrology, main roads, etc.) useful for students and people in business

133
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

• California Forest and Range Experiment

Station. Vegetation type maps of California and western Nevada. Prepared by Forest Survey Staff, A.E. Wieslander in charge ... in cooperation with the University of Califomia. [Washington, D.C., 1932-38].

• Los Angeles City. Bureau of Engineering.

Street Opening & Widening Division. Topographic Map sets of Santa Monica

Mountafrrs, Sunland-Tujunga-Verdugo

Mountains, North-East Los Angeles, Sylmar-Granada Hills, Chatsworth

Reservoir-Canoga-Park-Knapp Ranch, Baldwin Hills-Westchester- Playa Del Rey, San Pedro, LA Freeway Downtown Loop,

Central LA, and Benedict Canyon. Los Angeles: Bureau of Engineering, 1959-75.

• Los Angeles (Calif.). Police Dept. Area

boundaries of the Los Angeles Police Department [map]. Los Angeles, CA: Los Angeles Police Department, Cartography and Visual Aids Unit, [1992-96] .

• Nature Conservancy (U.S.) Color infra-red

aerial photos of Santa Cruz Island. Santa

Barbara, CA: Pacific Western Aerial Surveys, 1985.

• United States. Bureau of the Census. 1 990

County Block Maps. S.T.F. series for Los Angeles County (includes census tracts. Washington: U.S. Bureau of the Census,

[1991].

• United States. Bureau of Land Management. [Township plat maps of the United States]. [1855?- What seems to be a workable (but not easily fundable) solution is to have two scanners: one

for oversize items, e.g., maps, and the other a production-level scanner for air photos, that would travel from campus to campus, starting with the items of greatest use to the largest number of University of California users (e.g., the aforementioned historic USGS topographic

quadrangles), or unique items at greatest risk of being damaged or lost. In any case, the

digitized items would be prime candidates for inclusion in or transparent search by the Alexandria Digital Library. The Alexandria Digital Library

First, a few words about the Alexandria Digital Library (ADL), how it began, what it is, and its goals and accomplishments. Its overall goal is to build a distributed digital library for geographically referenced materials - maps,

images, text, multimedia, and so forth. The

Alexandria Digital Library is one of six Digital Library Initiative (DLI) projects funded jointly by the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA), and the National Aeronautics and Space

Administration (NASA). The six funded institutions are Carnegie-Mellon, Stanford, the University of California at Berkeley, the University of Califomia at Santa Barbara, the University of

Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, and the

University of Michigan at Ann Arbor. Each of the six projects, which began in October of 1994, and run through September of 1998, has

a different focus; the focus of ADL is to provide

online access to georeferenced information, with an emphasis on spatial data.

Since it is estimated that about 90 percent of

all spatial data is available only in hard-copy

form, metadata is of the greatest importance,

given that very often that is all the user will be

able to find in digital form. ADL has a

beta-test site up on the Web site, which we

encourage you to visit, try out, and let us know

how to improve. For more information on ADL, or on any of the other five DLI projects, go to the Web site: < http://alexandria.sdc. ucsb.edu >.

As a major part of the prototype, approximately one hundred items in digital form were ingested. About 60 of these were

aerial photographs; only three or so were

hardcopy maps, and the rest were

georeferenced information already in digital form (e.g., AVHRR - Advanced Very High

Resolution Radiometer; DEM - Digital 134
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

Elevation Model; DLG - Digital Line Graph; TIGER files from the 1990 U.S. Census;

Landsat satellite images; SPOT satellite images;

a text on the Channel Islands with a link to an image of the islands). A CD-ROM was made

with metadata for all the images on it, plus about 40 of the actual digital items. Why did the prototype, in the scanning arena, focus on air photos? Several influences at the same time. Firstly, MIL has about 3.8 million

air photos. The photographs of southern

California, especially of the older flights (such

as a 1 928 flight of the coast of Santa Barbara County) are very heavily used. This very frequent pulling and refiling (some indexes are used several times in one day) - even though it is done by student assistants and not by the

users - is deleterious to the indexes and the frames. It is extremely labor-intensive; one

search can easily take several hours of staff time to pull and refile. It is easy to misfile; and

as is true with all the "spineless" cartographic

materials, when an item is misfiled, especially

in such a large collection, it's gone. The scanners MIL has are a venerable, finicky Eikonix (ca. 1987) and a Sharp JX-610. The

Eikonix, which was purchased for about

$60,000, takes 45 minutes to scan a color

object, resulting in a 48Mb file, or about 20

minutes to scan a 1 5Mb black and white file; in either case the result is a 6,000 x 6,000

pixel image, no matter what the size of the

object, be it 35mm slide or 5' x 4' nautical

chart.

Unfortunately it is almost impossible to get a good color balance unless one is scanning a transparency on a light table (a consistent light source is essential). Maps are not

transparencies, and in addition we were not

interested in scanning the maps in sections, as has been done in other libraries; this meant we

were effectively limited to scanning air photos. The Sharp has a maximum size of 1

1 " x 1 7," with several different dpi's possible: 150, 200,

300, 400, and 600. It takes well under five minutes to scan one item, even at the 600 dpi

that MIL selected to scan its air photos (which

resulted in 29Mb for black and white and 98Mb for color). Thus the Sharp (which was

ordered with a special attachment so that it could scan transparencies) is ideal to scan 9" x 9" air photos, which constitute the vast majority of MIL's air photo collection; we do

have about 90,000 4" x 5" obliques and

perhaps 10,000 9" x 18" air photos. We did discover later on that the Sharp does introduce some distortion, in the direction of the scanning arm; this means that the scans are not

appropriate for use in photogrammetry,

although for general use, they are fine. During January of 1997, MIL initiated a pilot production-scanning project, using the Sharp

scanner and funded by research done by the University of Arizona. One skilled (Arc/Info, Unix, scanner) worker could scan and create metadata for three frames per hour. This worker also generated coordinates for frames

off air-photo mosaics and other indexes at the

rate of 400 frames per hour. Another reason that the air photos are an

excellent choice for scanning is that the size of a monitor of a computer is seldom more than twenty-one inches and for probably the majority of users it is much less. Air photos

are perfect: they are 9" x 9", and thus can be

displayed on many monitors at exactly the size of the original item, or even larger. While it is true that air photos are very high resolution, well beyond the 600 dpi-maximum of the Sharp scanner, for many users, the 600 dpi

resolution that appears on a screen monitor seems to be acceptable. While there are maps that are 8.5" x 1

1 ", the bulk of MIL'S maps are far larger, since MIL

specializes in medium-scale topographic

sheets (say, 2' x 3') and nautical charts (which

can easily be, as was previously mentioned, 3' X 4' and even larger). This meant that if MIL

had decided to scan maps, users would first have had to view a thumbnail, and then zoom

in to an area of interest. The problems of providing users with a location map, scale, north arrow, and legend that could be popped

up at any time the user needed them will need

to be solved over the next two years, but were

135
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

certainly not anything we could deal with in the short term.

Air photos are one layer of information, which means that scanning them works extremely

well as a form of delivery of information. What some users need to do is to manipulate

the different layers of information that make up

each map, which means that ideally the

individual print separates would be scanned

(although there is technology that can "scan" a printed map and separate out the layers with some level of success). On the other hand, many users just need to look at a map

(sometimes slightingly called the "pretty picture" syndrome) so certainly scans of maps

are by no means useless. It happens that the

University of California at Santa Barbara has both a very active Geography Department that emphasizes the use of spatial data in digital form, and the National Center for Geographic

Information and Analysis. Given those two

points, and given that Alexandria is a research

project, what would be most appropriate both

for the faculty and for the ADL funding

agencies would be to work with layers of information. During a late-January 1997 meeting of the ADL

Advisory Board, the main recommendation of the Board was the need for increased content

(data and metadata) in Alexandria. In light of

this recommendation, MIL is working on

extending the pilot production-scanning

project, since the nearly one gigabyte a day

resulting from this work now has a place to go

- disk storage - and a server capable of

handling heavy traffic - a DEC AlphaServer 4100, whose system name is, appropriately

enough, fat_albert. Conclusion

Spatial-data collections find themselves in the

"interesting times" of the Chinese proverb, as we simultaneously maintain our hard-copy

collections while steadily and increasingly

collecting data in digital form. Digitizing the hard-copy collections to keep them from damage caused by handling more and more

looks like the way we will need to proceed.

1 . Draft on digitization criteria; LJC selection

criteria for digitization. Draft, 21 November 1996. [Oakland, CA?:

University of California Office of the

President?}, 1996. Message-id: Pine.ULT.3.91. 9701 21 151 901.1 3752A1 00000@ariz.library.ucsb.edu

2. [Carver, Larry]. Draft 1.0 (UC/S working

group for distributed spatially indexed

information), 8-19-96; Alexandria Digital Library for Spatially Indexed Information. Santa Barbara, CA: Map and Imagery

Laboratory, Davidson Library.

http://alexandria.sdc. ucsb.edu/'can/er/ ucop3.htm

136
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

Preservation of Cartographic Materials: A Case

Study

David Cobb

Harvard University Cambridge, MA

Traditionally, preservation of maps has usually involved familiar practices of paper

conservation and may have involved simple

techniques such as tape removal, mending of small tears, and paper cleaning. Similarly, the process could become more involved with washing, applying a lining, varnish removal, and deacidification; and these processes

usually would be performed by professionally trained conservators. Such processes continue today for collections that have completed

needs assessment surveys and determine that certain items have artifactual value beyond

their information content. In other words, such items meet certain criteria:

• They are deemed important to the

institution's archival memory;

• They represent a significant cartographic

example of that region's history;

• The item has significant monetary value;

• It is extremely rare and available in very few collections; or is simply unique.

Let us be sure to understand that this process, the actual treatment of the original itself, is the only one that preserves the item and not just

its information. Another process that is often used for embrittled materials is microfilming and,

unfortunately, several collections of maps have been "presented" in this manner. Another

variant of this process is microfiche with which we are all too familiar. It is unfortunate because this is simply not a very satisfactory

method for reformatting or saving map

information. Filming a 6' x 9' map and placing

it on a one inch square piece of film has rather disastrous implications for access, viewing

(much less research), and for copying. However, in some cases, this is the only format

that you can acquire if interested in fire insurance maps, some atlases, and a variety of

special collections offered by libraries. Most

libraries are familiar with the number of fire insurance maps available on microfilm and I suspect your patrons are as fond of using them

as ours are.

But before you think this may be another

discussion of these two varieties of preservation let me assure you that it is not. I want to discuss two very different approaches

to the preservation of cartographic materials

that are ongoing in the Harvard Map

Collection. The first involved the creation of a prototype

collection of maps that could be used to evaluate the use of Kodak Photo CD

technology. For a variety of reasons we chose

the geographical area of the Middle East and

specifically the country of Israel. While most

libraries do not like to admit their mistakes, I will admit to you that this project failed miserably on almost every variable that we

attempted to evaluate. The major factor was

that too many of the maps resembled my

microfilm analogy of the 6' x 9' foot map

being reduced to one inch of film. However,

in this case, we were taking a 2' x 4' mapthink of the geographic north-south shape of Israel—and attempting to reduce that to a 35mm color slide. When we photographed

137
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

our ubiquitous 8.5" x 1

1 " CIA map of Israel we

had much better success; however, there are very few such sized maps for Israel. The issue here was not the failure of the Kodak Photo CD technology, but rather the innocence that we exhibited while riding on the edge of a new technology in that historic year of 1994!

Perhaps we should have learned to step back and let others experiment, but it wasn't long

before we entertained further experimentation

with this technology as it tantalized our minds

with thoughts of improved access and

mitigation of preservation concerns. Our

discussions with a commercial firm, already working at Harvard on other scanning projects,

led us to believe that we might have success if we chose a genre of materials smaller in size and a consistency of size would also make it more cost efficient. After some review, we

created a selection of consistently sized

materials that were less than 3' x 3' by

choosing to photograph and scan sections of our early fire insurance map collection. After

initial testing proved satisfactory, we decided

to photograph about 2,500 images from

several years and from different map

publishers. Remember, this was also going to be a test on improved access and we needed a

large image file which could be tested as a

suitable substitute for paper files.

First, once again, let me remind you that this is not preserving the item but rather reformatting

it. However, this reformatting hopefully will improve access to these materials, allowing the

originals to be used far less, and that may be

considered a "preservation" benefit to this process.

Let me stress that it is relatively easy and

inexpensive to photograph and scan onto Kodak Photo CDs. What is far more difficult is to then provide bibliographical or descriptive access to, not only the titles on these CDs, but

also the individual images themselves. Certain

atlas titles, for example, included double-page maps, and it was decided to photograph each

of these as two images, rather than one. Suddenly, the one page index at the front of each volume was no longer valid as it now had

two individual images for each one in the

original. As our technology increases, be

forewarned that you will fall prey to another techno phobia: why can't we now index more

information such as bridges, wharves,

buildings, parks, etc. The problem is you can, and this is fine if you reformatted 10 or 12 maps, but not fine when you have done about 2,500 of them.

Additionally, you are faced with creating a separate database for searching these items, keying the index to an individual CD, then

inserting the CD, and searching for Image #27

for example. In other words, there is no magic

software that allows you to query

"Massachusetts State House" and in fifteen seconds the image showing the State House

appears on your screen. In reality, you will have to create a database with all of the

buildings you wish to search and then key them to "CD #" and then "Image" on that CD.

This will become more complicated if you

have 4 or 5 different images of the State House, on different CDs, representing different chronological dates, different publishers, and

perhaps even different scales. To be perfectly honest, this is the stage where we find ourselves: attempting to decide which

database will best satisfy our needs knowing

that we will have multiple results to some of our searches and identifying a database that is expandable. The Kodak Photo CD technology

provides you with five different resolutions ranging in computer file size from about 256

Kb to 1 8 Mb. Some computers may not even

be able to work with this largest file of 1 8 Mb

and it suffers from being relatively slow to load

(an average of 45 seconds on a high end

machine) and the entire image often cannot be viewed on one screen. Conversely, if someone wishes to concentrate on a particular segment of the map, requiring several zoom

magnifications, this is the best size to work

with. The intermediate file size, 4.5 MB, loads much more quickly, can be viewed entirely on one screen, and does allow considerable

flexibility within the image.

For larger maps, and for serious research purposes, libraries may wish to consider the

138
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings Kodak Pro Photo CD, where an additional

sixth file size averaging 72 Mb has been

added. Obviously, fewer maps can be placed on one CD but the resolution for detailed viewing offers considerable improvements. It should be added that this information is current as of April 1 997 and we can expect

considerable improvement in CD, software, and equipment technology in the next few

years, if not in the next few months.

Let me state categorically that CD technology

is not, and probably will not be, THE answer

to our preservation or access problems.

Perhaps it is appropriate to insert in our

discussion the phrase: "at what price?" A

Photo CD with about 100 images can be

created for about $100, to which should be added 35mm photography of the materials. Our intent was never to "discard or recycle" our original maps but rather to improve access

to them and better preserve them through the planned less handling as mentioned earlier. We believe we can create a useful indexing database and then completely substitute the

digital copies for reference and research rather than the originals, thereby mitigating our

preservation concerns for these materials. Our

access to these materials improves as students can produce color copies in the Map

Collection in less than a few minutes. Moreover, imaging software allows the user to magnify their specific area of interest, albeit limited, better than the human eye can and far less expensively than photographic processes used in the past.

Therefore, we will accomplish our goals of improved access and preservation for this collection using CD digital technology. For considerably less than $5,000 we have been

able to take nearly 3,000 fragile materials out

of circulation, away even from reference,and

yet believe we will be able to improve access

to them. Obviously, the benefits are on the access side and we will still have to address

the preservation issues in the future. Our goal was to preserve materials for the future when we might be better able to address these

issues. We were definitely fearful of losing many of these items due to the increased

popularity of early fire insurance maps. It is hoped, over the next several years, to move

more heavily used and fragile materials to this format for quick reference, ease of copying, and to decrease use of the original paper

materials. Such materials will include

additional fire insurance maps, maps of the Boston region, maps of New England, and some of our urban maps of European cities which are heavily used by landscape

architecture and planning students. A quite different, and yet very related, project was created based upon the need of students and faculty. Essentially, that need was their use of the 1 990 U.S. Federal Census. It was

aging rapidly, and they required additional information that would be up-to-date. Even

though very few of our students are from

Massachusetts they are still using the state, and

the City of Boston, as the laboratory for many

of their studies which require socio-economic and environmental data.

Unlike the rest of the country where counties

are the basis for most data dissemination, it is the town that is the collection dataset for most

of New England. This was still not nearly as detailed as census tracts or block groups, but

Massachusetts' 351 towns certainly provided a

far greater geospatial variation than would its fourteen counties. We soon found ourselves

collecting information on shopping centers, tax

rates, employment, supplemental income,

race, and ethnicity. It also soon became

apparent that we were identifying data that were far more detailed than the decennial Census and data that would never be included

in any decennial Census. An Advisory Board, including a local geography professor and demographer, led us

to believe that we should publish an atlas for the State of Massachusetts. Further discussions

led us to realize the folly of such a proposition. We knew that it would become a static collection of information the moment it was

published and the very data itself revealed the dynamics of the changing economy, society's

transitions, and the increasing challenges to our environment.

139
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

It soon became apparent that we should

consider what had been in front of us the whole time: the World Wide Web. There were other atlases on the Web which we

studied, reviewed, and then created a list of our own needs:

• Work interactively rather than just providing images;

• Expandable;

• Work with current Internet provider

software packages;

• Provide zoom features;

• Provide geographic data features: scale, legend, and radial mapping;

• Provide graphic images, data behind them, and metadata files, and

• Allow users easy access and self- explanatory use - a REAL challenge! We are fortunate to have a cooperative

working relationship with the Environmental

Research Systems Institute, Inc. (ERSI) through

the ARL CIS Literacy Project and with its Boston regional office. Discussions soon began as to how we might address our needs and goals related to the collection, cataloging, and dissemination of digital data and

progressed from considering ARC-INFO, to Map Objects, and eventually to the Arc View

Internet Explorer. ERSI's cooperation was

invaluable to this project and their time investment and expertise allowed us to progress to our defined goals and objectives. A cooperative resource sharing relationship with one of Massachusetts' planning

organizations, the Metropolitan Area Planning

Council, led to discussions with the Massachusetts Regional Planning Associations. Their support and financial assistance moved

the project forward and led us to concentrate our efforts in the following categories: geographic boundaries; communications;

crime; education; employment; environmental

regulation; income; physical characteristics; population; race/ethnicity; real estate/lodging; and transportation. The atlas debuted on January 10, 1997 as one

of the first interactive state atlases with 150

different data layers. The user interface continues to be reviewed, revised, and

hopefully improved. The limitations of one

screen "to inform everyone about everything"

is challenging and yet it should be realized

that most people will probably not read your

instructions on "How to Use the Atlas." The

challenge is to address CIS issues in a nonjargon language that will be understood by a

variety of users who are essentially unfamiliar with the techniques or principles of CIS. We

assume that our users will range from the state

official or business planner with some CIS

experience, to the middle school student who

may just happen upon the Atlas on the

Internet. It is important that we not affront the

intelligence of the practioner nor make it so

difficult for the uniniated to use it. Such a project has several implications regarding service and data interests. Emphasize State & Local Data vs. Federal Data

Regardless of what may happen with Census

2000, libraries will always be faced with the

issue of updating the decennial census as researchers continue to demand, and expect, more up-to-date data and geography. If the data collection for Census 2000 should be

decreased, this would place an even greater emphasis and dependence upon state and

local data for planning and research purposes. Our past practices in libraries have not given

this data its proper credit and we may find ourselves more dependent upon it than ever

before. New Partnerships with Data Creators As libraries become more familiar with CIS

technology and data management techniques, we will become "players" in the digital field of CIS access and will be able to exhibit our

140
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

strength of adding service. It is very probable

that libraries will now be invited to sit and

discuss access and service issues with the data

creators and form a profitable cooperative

relationship.

Creates a 'Library Without Walls'

Implications are positive for the digital library as we allow more users to enter this library than ever before. It is not dependent upon

discipline, and it is theoretically open twentyfour hours a day and 365 days a year. The

negative side is that we may no longer know

our users nor are we able to provide the reference interview that can be so important to providing the appropriate material for the question.

Attracts Users Who Would Never Use the

Library While it is difficult to monitor currently, it is apparent that a wider variety of users is attracted to digital data and its applications than was previously attracted to traditional print resources. It is also important to note that

interest in the print collections is rising in a

similar geometric pattern as persons may

initially approach the library with a digital question and leave with a traditional map

copy. Marketing/PR of CIS Services

Libraries that are able to move from the

traditional print world into the digital world, and back and forth, have a tremendous

marketing/PR potential. They have the ability to boast of their traditional collections and yet

let their users and the library administration know that they have not become a paper museum. They have chosen to participate in the new digital technology, and maps are one

of the most powerful tools in this arena.

Rethinking Archival Responsibilities As we begin to collect (and save?) digital data,

it becomes evident that we must give some

consideration to archival responsibilities. If we

choose to display a map of welfare recipients

in 1 996 what choices should we make when

the 1998 data arrives - do we simply delete

the "old" data? Often, as libraries are well aware, it is the historical data that are far more

valuable than current information. Emphasis on Data A CIS database emphasizes data, not maps, and that will be a potentially significant change for map libraries as they evolve into the next millennium. Not only will this change our current thought process but it may

place libraries in conflict with other departments and disciplines that have

considered data their discipline. It is important

that we work with others in the library, and

outside, to convince them of the critical importance of CIS as an analytical tool and how data dependent the technology is. We

must also look at data as an access versus ownership issue, and that is a library philosophy that will continue to be discussed

well into the future.

141
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depositoiy Conference Designing Web Pages for Depositories

Jennifer E. McMulIen

The College of Wooster

Wooster, OH

Who, at this point, has not heard about the wonders of the Internet and the vast potential of the WorlcTWide Web? Who has not heard

the colorful, if cliched, term of "information superhighway"? The number of Web sites continues to grow exponentially, and an

increasing number of those sites provide

public access to Government information, whether on official Government sites, unofficial or personal sites, or through

depository library home pages. The

widespread presence of depositories on the Web has had three significant results. First, more Government information has been made

available to more people as librarians and staff track down obscure sites and provide links to them through their pages. Second, access to

this information has often been simplified as depository staffers make use of their library- oriented conceptual frameworks (such as subject headings and bibliographies) to help people navigate Government sites. Finally, it becomes more difficult for those libraries not

yet represented on the Web to present a new

framework for accessing Government

information on the Internet without repeating

the style and organizational approach that other libraries have used.

For those depository libraries that have

hesitated to make their presence more widely

known through the Web, for whatever reason,

I hope that this discussion will give you several new ideas and encourage you to make your own contributions in promoting Government

information on the Internet. After all, if I could

learn how to design Web pages and live to tell about it, you can, too! My colleague, Rosalind Tedford, and I would like to present the steps you might follow to create your own Web

pages based on the experiences we had at our

individual institutions.

Before I began to work on our depository page

at The College of Wooster\ I asked myself

certain questions that I think are important

considerations for anyone creating any new Web pages: Do you want to revise an old page or create a new one? Can you revise an older page with minimal effort, or do you need to create an entirely new one? In my case, the

library had a government resources Web

page in place when I took over the

project; however, it was poorly organized and thus not very useful. The student

assistant who updated all of the library's pages could not keep up with the

constantly changing needs of the depository page. I therefore decided to take advantage of the summer break to begin a complete overhaul of the page's

organization and design. Do you have experience in HJMU

I had absolutely no experience in HTML

when I started the task of revising our Web page, so I knew I would need to

learn the basics quickly. What technical requirements do you need to meet?

I had the good fortune to work in the same building as my chief Web contacts, so I could get fast ansv>/ers to my questions about software for writing and updating

the pages (these programs were already

installed on my workstation) as well as any layout or content requirements. I had no real restrictions; I just needed to be 142
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings aware of how our depository page would

fit in with the library pages. Unfortunately, some other Web servers have more stringent requirements, and it is best to learn about them before you

invest any time in your page. (Otherwise, you may find you have to start over!) What do you want irom your Web page? The two main questions to ask about your Web page are "What information will this page provide?" and "Who do I intend to reach with this information?" With so much information available on the Web,

you want to be sure that you are not "reinventing the wheel." In my case, the main audience for our department pages

has always been The College of Wooster community. That meant I needed to tailor the information on the pages to the research interests of faculty, students, and

staff, interests that closely follow the general strengths of the college curriculum as well as of our depository

collection. In addition, I wanted to ensure

that the pages would be useful for those of us working in the library to help further those research interests, so the pages needed to be a combination of specific source sites and directories or locators. Where to Start Having answered these preliminary questions, my next step was to lay the groundwork for the Web pages. My top priority was to learn HTML quickly and thoroughly. An eight-week

e-mail course on HTML did not prove to be as useful as I had hoped since I found the pace

too slow, and the computing center did not

offer a course on HTML until well after I had

started teaching myself. Fortunately, our

library had a copy of Laura Lemay's excellent book Teach Yourself Web Publishing With HTML 3.0 in a Week^ By reading a chapter or two a day and following the exercises outlined

in the book, I picked up the basics very

quickly.

Once I learned HTML, I needed to do a little research on how best to use it in reorganizing and redesigning our Web page. By looking at the home pages of several other depositories^

I learned many different ways to organize the

links to Government sites. In addition, the pages of other depositories gave me ideas for page design and layout. Some libraries used a simple, straightforward outline of the information they provided, while others used

graphics, tables, and even frames to enhance

their presentation. Since my knowledge of HTML was still at a relatively basic level, I found that by viewing the document source of pages I particularly liked, I could study the HTML commands used to create the layout elements I admired and then create my own

design without copying someone else's page.

After exploring the possibilities of design and

organization, I started searching for possible

links to include in our department pages. My

first step was to evaluate all of the existing sites from the old page and then find new sites to add to our page. Most sites previously listed on our page were still useful and could form

the foundation of the revised pages, but some

sites had been upgraded from gopher sites to WWW addresses or had simply disappeared and therefore had to be rediscovered. I then needed to find additional sites for our pages, a process that was easy and entertaining, if time- consuming. I found several useful sites announced on GOVDOC-L by other Webmasters or other depository librarians who

had discovered these sites. While examining

other depository Web sites, I also looked at some of the links listed there and added them

to my list. Finally, to make certain that I hadn't missed any other potentially useful sites, I tried several searches using Yahoo!^ and other

search engines, occasionally just browsing

their directories for any unfamiliar sites. Every

time I found a site that looked interesting, I spent some time browsing the site, evaluating both the information found there and the ease

with which I could navigate the site, then added it to an ever-growing list of links.

143
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

Spinning Your Web

Armed with a long list of sites, I started to create (or "spin") our new Web pages by

sorting through these sites and organizing them into larger categories that would make

navigation easier. I started with five broad

categories and then subdivided each category

into more specific subjects:

• Government Publications at Wooster

(collection, hours, staff)

• Federal Depository Library Program (plus resources for librarians)

• Guides to Government Information (in- house guides, guides from other

depositories, Internet guides)

• Key Government Sites (Federal, state, locators)

• What's New (new Internet publications, current topics, news sources)

This division soon proved too vague and

unwieldy, especially since the bulk of our links ended up on an oversized Key Sites page. I often had difficulty finding links myself because I had forgotten on which page I had

listed them. A new organization quickly became necessary, and after looking at the examples of other depositories once more, I came up with a more detailed framework:

• General Information

collection. Depository Program, staff, guides

• Finding Federal Government Information GPO Access, searching by agency,

subject, SuDocs number, title

• Finding Other Government Information

state and local, foreign, international

• In the News

current topics, news sources, selected new sites

Once this new organizational structure was in place, I could then sort links into the appropriate categories and create brief but

useful lists of sites for each category. Developing the design and layout of the pages

turned out to be even more of a trial-and-error

effort. Given my limited knowledge of HTML

and my desire to have a straightforward, useful

site, I decided against using a graphicsintensive approach in designing the pages.

Instead, I kept the information organized in brief lists with minimal graphics, choosing

only a depository logo to head each page.

This simpler approach ensured that each page would load relatively quickly, encouraging

greater use^ It has also given me very few

maintenance problems to solve! Once I had developed various outlines of design and organization for the department

pages, I created brief practice pages from

personal bookmarks that allowed me to test my designs. These pages also gave me an

opportunity to experiment with color, graphics, and layout as well as to sharpen my

HTML skills. As I felt more comfortable with

the elements of HTML and had a better idea of how I wanted the pages for the department to look, I began creating the "official" Government Publications pages. It took a

great deal of tinkering with the commands, but

I finally came up with a layout that appealed to me. I then created a template page with the header and footer information as well as other

standard HTML commands. This approach

helped me standardize the entire layout for all of the department pages without much

additional effort.

After I completed the department pages to my

initial satisfaction, I set up a testing period for the new pages. First, I saved the new pages to

diskette, loaded them on the workstations of everyone in the department, then reset the preferences in Netscape on each computer to choose the new department page as the home

page. This made it very easy for all of us to

test the pages whenever we pulled up

Netscape, and it encouraged us to explore all

144
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

of the links listed. Once we had all thoroughly

tested the pages and I had made a few recommended changes, I then took the final step of loading the pages onto the college's

server. The second phase of testing took place

as I sent messages to friends and colleagues through an announcement on GOVDOC-L

notifying them of the new page and requesting

that people look at the pages, test the links, explore the organization-in short, "kick the wheels" on the newest Government

publications vehicle to hit the Information Superhighway. The many responses I received were all greatly appreciated and very useful. Keeping Your Pages Current While I wish I could say that I had been able

to rest on my laurels at this point, the most

critical part of creating Web pages has been an ongoing one: keeping the pages current. This can only be accomplished when you yourself use your pages frequently. The easiest way to remind myself to use the department pages on

a regular basis is to keep the home page on my

Web browser set to the department page so

that I can start searching from this point. I have also reset the Netscape preferences on

the public workstations in Government

Publications to pull up our home page first so

that our patrons are encouraged to use our site and to give us feedback. Maintaining the status quo on our pages, however, is inadequate in itself, so I regularly

test and evaluate new sites. Notices and announcements about new Government and

Government-related sites appear often on GOVDOC-L, so I collect the messages and test each one for relevance and usefulness to our

department. I also keep my eyes open for other sites mentioned in the local paper, in library journals, in magazines devoted to computers or the Internet, on the radio, and in Web sites that review excellent new sites. Once I find a site that I think would make a good addition to our pages, I edit and reload the appropriate pages on our server. Beyond adding sites, I keep the pages well- maintained by testing all links periodically.

Given the size and number of our department

Web pages at this point, this can be a time- consuming and dull endeavor. (My last check

of all our links took two afternoons!) However, it is critical to the accuracy and

currency of any Web page and should be done

on a regular basis. If any links are found

leading to dead ends, I first try to find a new

URL for the site, and if that fails, I drop the site from our pages. One thing that I have found to be very useful in keeping track of the many

links I've made is a master list of all the URLs

used in our pages. I have simply listed these

links by title (often a brief form of the title that

I can remember), indicated on which pages each link appears, and then provided the URL. When I start testing our links, I pull up the master list and correct URLs as necessary, both

in the master list and in the HTML files.

Aside from these technical considerations, you

can keep your pages up-to-date by continuing

to learn from other libraries' examples. It never hurts to check back periodically and see what other depositories are doing with their Web pages! You can learn new techniques or

get ideas for updated designs, especially if you

reach a stage when you think you'd like to try something a little new with your own page.

In looking back at this entire project, I must

say that learning how to design Web pages has been much easier than I ever expected.

Although the HTML tags seemed like gibberish

at first glance, I eventually found them to be as simple to decipher as the commands from any word processing program. Creating the design and layout for a Web page became easier as I learned what elements produced the greatest

visual appeal. Although designing, maintaining, and updating our Web pages has been a time-consuming effort, the time spent

has proven to be a worthwhile investment as the pages become a more valuable reference and research tool for library staff and patrons

alike.

145
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

1. http://www.wooster.edu/Library/ GovDoc.html

2. Lemay, Laura. Teach Yourself Web

Publishing With HTML 3.0 in a Week.

2nd ed. Indianapolis: Sams.net, 1 996. A

third edition is now available and covers HTML 3.2.

3. Among the many depository home pages now available on the Web, I found the following to be the most helpful:

• Oklahoma State University http://www.library.okstate.edu/dept/ govdocs/docs.htm

• University of Memphis

http://www.lib.memphis.edu/gpo/ unclesam.htm

• University of the South

http://www.sewanee.edu/dupontlibrary/

GovDocs/govdoc.html

and

• Western Illinois University http://www.wiu.edu/users/milibo/wiu/

depts/govpubs/home.sht Other depository home pages can be found

through the University of Idaho's listing at http://www.lib.uidaho.edu/govdoc/otherdep.

html

4. http://www.yahoo.com/

5. This approach has been advocated by many Web designers, including Jakob

Nielsen (in "Top Ten Mistakes in Web

Design," The Alertbox : Current Issues in Web Usability May 1996: online. Available: <http://www.useit.com/alertbox/9605. html> and Maggie Parhamovich (in "Spinning Your Own Web," Documents to the People 24.1 (1996): 48-49).

146
7997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

Creating Web Pages for Depositories

Rosalind Tedford

Wake Forest University Winston-Salem, NC

History of Our Pages at Wal<e Forest Wake Forest is in a unique position currently because we have a partnership with IBM

which, among other things, includes providing

all incoming students with IBM Thinkpads. The library has signed on as the training center

for the project so we have been provided with

the latest technology in the form of desktop and laptop computers, and annual software upgrades.

This was not always the case, however. Three

years ago when I assumed the position I currently hold. Wake Forest had student labs which could access the Internet through

Mosaic, but most of us in the library only had

access through a gopher client. Web pages if done at all (and few were) were done using pico and typing in the HTML by hand. I had a friend who showed me my first HTML

document and based on that, I designed a very

basic home page for myself. Without direct Ethernet connections, however, I spent a lot of time running from computer to computer to

test out my code. I gradually learned more

code, how to do alignment, how to change

font size, etc. and I began to consider designing a WWW page for our Government Documents department. The problem was, I didn't have a computer

with Internet access. Once I signed on to become a computer trainer for the pilot Thinkpad project in the summer of 1 995, I received a laptop and got more training in Netscape and could finally begin to work on a page for our department. I was still typing in

all the code for myself and the initial setup of our pages took me almost 2 months. As one of the few people in the librar/ who knew HTML,

I took it on myself to do the searching, coding and testing of ever/ link and image. I did not have direct Ethernet access to the Internet in my office until winter of that year, and so I designed the pages on my hard drive and then would pass them to others to mount on our WWW server. Halfway into that academic year, however, we

had our software upgraded to Windows95 and

direct Ethernet lines run into our offices. Then my career as a Web master was altered

forever. I heard from a colleague that Microsoft had written a plug-in for Word

which would write the code for you. I downloaded it for free from the Microsoft Web

site (www.microsoft.com) and taught myself

how to use it. It was a great improvement.

Looking back now, it really didn't do too

terribly much, but it would write the code for images, font size, horizontal rules, etc. The

things it could not do (background, color, centering) I would go back into the code and do manually. So while not perfect, it did save me a good deal of time in my first rewrite of our pages. The rewrite took me perhaps 2 weeks rather than two months, but then again I was only updating the pages, not creating them from scratch. I was, however, still dependent on others to mount the pages once

I had created them on my hard drive. Then, last summer, we were upgraded to MSWord 7.0 and with that came a new

version of Internet Assistant as a standard

feature of the University's software load. This

version of Internet Assistant did alignment,

color, backgrounds, and even tables. I used

this to update our pages last fall and winter. About that same time, Netscape came out with Navigator Gold which was not only an Internet

147
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

browser, but a Web page editor as well. I tested it out. There were some things I liked better about it and some things I liked better about Internet Assistant, so this spring when I redid our pages once again, I used them both. The nice thing about Netscape was that you

didn't have to have two big applications up

and running at the same time, and on my

1 2Mb laptop this made things quicker. Netscape Gold could not, however, do tables which we used in our pages and so I switched back and forth between the two. I did gain a

great advantage, however, when I got access to the Web server directly. This allows me now

to update our pages at any time without

relying on others. Now, however, with Netscape 3.0, the editing

capabilities are greatly improved and at this point surpass Internet Assistant, and this is what I am currently using to edit my pages. Rumor has it that the new versions of both Word and Netscape will improve their Internet editing abilities even more. We will be upgraded to Office 97 this summer and I will learn more about the built in Web editing

features of them then. As of now, however, I am committed to Netscape Gold 3.0 for my

next round of updates which will be in May. The Current State of Web Pages at Wake

Forest

I currently spend a couple of hours each week

at most adding links that I find out about from GOVDOC-L or through other sources. Then, each semester, I usually do a big overhaul of the pages which usually takes a week or more.

I check all of our links myself, even though I know there are programs which check them

for you. The couple of time I used these programs they took me more time than just checking them out by hand. I check not only

to be sure the pages still exist, but that the information I linked to them for is still there. I also use these overhauls to change images,

backgrounds, footers, etc. When I first began I wanted links to every site that existed, but as I have progressed and

realized that there is no way I can keep up

with all the sites, I let others do the work and

link to large sites which keep up with things

better than I. Why reinvent the wheel?

Instead, we have concentrated our energies on

our North Carolina resources page which has

increased in size tenfold from its inception, because we feel that it is one place where we

can provide a service not available in hundreds of other locations. Using Editors to Create and Maintain WWW

Pages When Jennifer and I first discussed the idea of demonstrating HTML editors for you, I toyed

with the idea of demonstrating both Internet Assistant and Netscape Gold, but rather than

giving a cursory look at both, I have decided to concentrate only on Netscape Gold since this

is what most libraries have access to and since

it can perform all the functions previously done only by Internet Assistant. Most editors I have ever seen work essentially the same way,

so in essence, "seen one seen them all." What

I hope to do today is to give you a general idea

of how editors work by showing you

specifically how Netscape Gold works. If any

of you are interested in Internet Assistant, I have put a link to my tutorial on our WWW

page at WFU and this can be accessed at <http://www.wfu.edu/Library/govdoc/doclib.

htm>.

Before I begin, however, I want to talk a little bit about editors in general, what they are and

their benefits and drawbacks. Web editor

refers to any of the myriad of programs which

exist which write HTML code for you. All the

user generally has to do is to click buttons, fill in boxes and select options and the editor will compile all of the information for you. If you

save the document as an htm file, you can view it through Netscape or another browser.

Generally, editors give you a way to view the code if you wish, but this is not a necessary

step.

First, the bad news. Editors are not of consistent quality. Some are better than

others. There are hundreds out on the WWW

free for the downloading and there are

148
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings hundreds being sold commercially. With the advances in Netscape, however, I would not suggest spending any money on an editor UNLESS you have complicated CGI scripts, Java applets, or other complicated elements to incorporate into your page. For the standard Web page, Netscape Gold works beautifully. Another drawback to editors is that many

people learn to design Web pages with them

and never really learn HTML code. While this

is seen by some as a good thing, (HTML is tedious), it can ultimately harm you because

there are always things an editor does not do

at all, or does not do right. If you know

HTML, you can go into the code and fix these problems with a backslash or a simple

command. Along the same lines, it is frequently the case that when you visit another WWW page that you see things you like. If you know HTML you can view the source code and see how they did it and then alter your own page to match. I would not suggest using editors instead of learning HTML, but

rather as an accessory to HTML knowledge.

On the positive side, however, editors save you lots of time, especially if you have large pages to create. You can copy and paste text and images into them and the code is written

for you. This saves you the time of hunting

through your code for the one tag which you

forgot to add in. Pointing and clicking at boxes and filing in blanks is also quicker than typing everything in. Changing your background color, for example, is as easy as finding a new color on the palette and clicking on it-no 5-digit color code needed. For those

familiar with HTML, I think editors are great.

Creating WWW Documents with Netscape

3.0

Preliminary Steps

1 . To create a new document, choose 'New Document - Blank' from the File menu.

Skip to step 3.

2. To edit an existing page, go to the page and click the edit button. You will see a

dialog box which will ask you to save the WWW page (and all the images associated with it) onto your hard drive. You cannot

edit directly on the WWW server!

3. Save your page (even though you haven't done anything yet). For those of you who

created a new blank page, you must choose 'Save As' from the 'File' menu.

Those of you who are using another page

to work from just chose to save in step 2. Time to Edit!

1 . You will see your page laid out in the Netscape editor window. You can type

directly into the window, just like with a word processor.

2. To change the color scheme or add a background image, go to the Document menu and choose Properties. There is a

section there dealing with color.

3. Formatting is simple from the Netscape

editor's toolbar. Put the mouse cursor over

a button to find out what it does. Many of the buttons, such as bullets, numbers,

indention and justification look just as they do in Microsoft Word.

4. Font size is controlled with the Increase and Decrease font size buttons. Next to them are the bold and italic options, as well as color. To use paragraph formats such as Headings, use the drop down

paragraph format menu.

5. To add a link, choose the picture of a link. You will be prompted for the URL

(address) and the title of your new link. To make an image into a link, select the image and then click the link button.

6. Adding a target, or bookmark, allows you

to navigate within a page. First, you add a

target to the point you want people to navigate to by highlighting the text or image which is to become the target. Then

you click the target button. You will be prompted to name the target. Then when

149
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

you create a link, you can send the link directly to the target location by selecting it from the targets box at the bottom.

7. To add an image, choose the image button. You will be prompted to enter or browse

for the image file, and be given options for how to wrap text around your image or how to deal with a text-only display. Note: You cannot see text wrapping in the

editing window. You must load your page

in the Browser window to see text wrap

around an image.

8. To add a horizontal rule, use the horizontal rule button: This will insert the

line all the way across the page. The

default height is 2 pixels. To alter either of these, click on the line and choose

"Horizontal line," from Properties menu,

9. To add a table, click the table button. You

will be given spaces to define the size of the table first and then once this has been

defined, you can go to the Properties menu, choose "Table" and define more

elements of your table including colors,

text alignment within cells, and many

other options.

1 0. For items not available in Netscape Gold, you can insert the HTML tag directly into your document by going to the Insert menu and choosing "HTML Tag."

1 1 . To see what your page will look like on the WWW, you can preview it through

Netscape. Just click the Netscape button on the toolbar and you will be prompted to save your document. Once saved, a Netscape window will open and VOILA!

Your document as it will look on the WWW.

150
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

Building Library-Agency Partnerships

Stuart M. Basefsky

Cornell University

Ithaca, NY

I. Why partnerships?

A. Seek win-win relationships for agencies and libraries in times marked by

budget constraints, technology

transitions, institutional re- organizations, and policy gaps.

1. Commonly, libraries lose access and control of information in these

situations, and agencies focus on

re-organization rather than

dissemination.

2. Opportunities are created for both

parties to solve their respective problems through cooperation and

sharing of skills and technological know-how.

B. Share the burden and the risks of developing long-term policy solutions

for information dissemination and

access.

C. Enhance reputations for efficiency and

meeting bottom-line demands.

1 . Libraries need to seek additional public and private support. Maintaining a high profile through

association with key agencies can

help.

2. Agencies need to demonstrate their

ability to function in a costeffective, efficient manner. By

partnering with key libraries in possession of cutting edge

technology and information skills, agencies prove themselves creative and innovative.

II. Different types and approaches for partnerships

A. Library initiated

B. Agency initiated

C. Need driven

D. Policy driven

III. The Catherwood Library example—

"Public Service Privatization"

A. The electronic archive at Catherwood:

http://www. i I r. cornel I .ed u/l i b/ e_archive/

B. Considerations for start-up: "Beyond

the Hype: Using Internet in Libraries" h tt p://www.lib.lsu.edu/govd ocs/ paperele.html

C. Outcome for public and library http://www.news.comell.edu/general/

Jan96/Catherwoodlnitiative.dg.txt

IV. Developing a culture of entrepreneurship

in libraries

V. Federal depository libraries are cooperative (not exclusive) agents for Government dissemination of information in an Internet environment.

A. Many libraries capable of providing

effective partnerships are not Federal depository libraries. These libraries should cooperate with GPO and the depository community via GOVDOC-L

and e-mail to insure access.

151
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

B. Many Federal depository libraries cannot afford partnerships based on

technological innovation. These

depositories should seek out

technologically capable libraries in their Congressional districts to partner with agencies akin to their interests.

C. Libraries no longer have walls. As long

as the information is freely available through a government monitored

access system, it does not matter whether the physical library in which it resides is a designated depository. Agencies should be directed to request assurance of long-term cooperation and

free access before entering into partnerships of this nature. Preference should be given to Federal, state and

municipally supported libraries when

these alternatives are available. Certainly, association and industry supported libraries are often equally

reliable. Go to: http://www.lib.lsu.edu/govdocs/ paperele.html for a Web version of the following which was presented at Syracuse

University on August 10, 1995.

Beyond the Hype: Using Internet in Libraries [Name of Conference]

Cooperative Collection Development of Important Government Information in Electronic Form by Subject Specialty Libraries Presented by Stuart M. Basefsky, Reference

Librarian, Martin P. Catherwood Library, School of Industrial & Labor Relations, Cornell

University August 10, 1995

' 3:45 pm. Room 123, ES Bird Library, Syracuse

University

I. Government Information and the Internet

A. Problems

1. Finding Internet Sources-lack of publicity

2. Archiving or "after release" retrievalfind the reference more than 6 months

after release

3. Reliability of data or verification of edition- especially if not on agency's own Internet site

4. Citing original documentation for later retrieval

5. Fugitive documents-not referenced by

traditional databases or indexes; not cataloged

6. Non-standard presentation of datainformation created for industry

(subject) specific clientele

7. Questionable role of depository

libraries

B. Prospects

1 . Library creates partnership(s) with agency or its divisions for distribution and archiving of information-offer

services free of charge, at least

initially; push for "public service

privatization"

2. Collect information (commit to long- term, electronic storage) and

disseminate it-no copyright concerns

3. Collaborate with other library and

information centers for cataloging,

archiving, publicity, authenticity, recommended forms of citation, and

reliable linkage

II. Why libraries should follow up on the prospects

A. Funding opportunities are createdindustries, associations, foundations, and even the government agency itself may find that funding this operation is

152
1 997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

advantageous as well as prestigious. Multi-media element of Internet makes

advertising of donor generosity easy.

B. Answers the question, "Where's the beef?"-biggest complaint about the

Internet is the lack of substantive information. This provides some of

that information (original source documentation).

C. Attracts users to your Web site, which you have produced at great costadvertising your Web site is easy when

users find useful information. This increases your user count. .Traditional, client-oriented and

scholarly reasons for collecting

III. Concrete examples of collecting

A. Monitor press releases and news stories

B. Use directories to contact offices holding information useful to your

library

C. Be careful about what you ask for, you

might get it.

1 . Start off with limited goals- experiment with the agency and

your Web to see the result. How

does this affect reference services? Are you getting new and different kinds of questions? What are the

staffing consequences of collecting electronically formatted materials?

2. Choose government publishing

projects with short lives to start with. Commissions, task forces, and short-term projects are idealto do otherwise potentially jeopardizes your relationship with

the agency if you find you cannot

perform. Keep your library's image in mind.

D. "Sell" your service to the agency by

explaining that you are providing

publicity, cataloging, archiving, and

other traditional types of library packaging that neither governmental

nor commercial agents are willing to

offer. Furthermore, you are giving free access to users and the service is "free of charge" to the agency.

E. Ask your contacts to keep you in mind

for other publications or projects.

F. Example from the Martin P. Catherwood Library, School of

Industrial & Labor Relations, Cornell

University Goto URL:

http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/lib/ e_archive/

IV. Need for library community cooperation

A. A clearinghouse for monitoring the

collection and distribution oi official government publications on the

Internet by libraries is needed-this is something that GODORT in ALA or GD/SIS in AALL should work on. Perhaps a collection development

listserv for Internet accessible government publications should be

established. Why not invite Marcive,

CIS, or other commercial services to help with the monitoring for the good

of everyone?

B. Establish an entrepreneurial spirit among government collection development librarians. Rely on this competitive enterprise to gather

publications in a diverse spectrum of subject specialties-it is too difficult to coordinate collection efforts nationwide. After a publication is collected, report it to the clearinghouse.

V. Turn this initiative into a public policy coup-Demonstrate to Congress and

the American people that free

153
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

enterprise is alive and well in libraries.

A. Tell all that this is a payback for past and future government support of

libraries. Libraries will voluntarily take over certain areas of government

responsibility in collection and

dissemination of information.

B. Tell industry to support libraries which

aid their future information needs by

collecting in this manner.

VI. Additional Spin-offs

A. Nation-wide electronic reserves become a possibility-well-crafted,

reliable sites holding original, government documentation can be

"pointed to" by any school or library as

part of an electronic reserve reading

list.

B. Produce instant bibliographies with

full-text pointers-the all-in-one library becomes a reality. Use a pathfinder (at least with government materials) to produce your own instant, subject

specialty library on your desktop. After using the materials, trash them but keep the bibliography with pointers for instant retrieval if necessary.

154
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

A Working Partnership

Gregory Lawrence

Cornell University

Ithaca, NY

Introduction The USDA Economics and Statistics System, a

joint partnership between the Albert R. Mann

Library and three economic agencies of the

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), began

three and a half years ago. The partnership with these agencies, the Economic Research

Service, the National Agricultural Statistics Service, and the World Agricultural Outlook

Board, supports a network site for up-to-date and historic agricultural economic information.

Currently, the site maintains 79 full-text serials and nearly 200 historic data series. A

significant portion of the data received is time

sensitive, which requires the library to post the information to the Internet within minutes. We disseminate this information via WWW,

gopher, telnet, ftp and e-mail, and this work is supported by 1 1 librarians and 7 library

assistants. Why a Partnership? You may ask why would a library seek out a partnership which requires a considerable commitment of staff time and resources? The answer lies in the mission of the

institution. Mann Library supports research and education for a land grant agricultural college. The land grant concept, as originally defined in the Morrill Acts in the 19th century,

sets aside public land to fund institutions of higher education which would provide

instruction in the agricultural and mechanical

arts. For over a century, the Department of Agriculture has promoted agricultural research and practice at these institutions, and the land

grant libraries have actively acquired USDA

publications about this research.

Mann Library is also a depository library which

collects agriculture and related information published by the Federal Government, and makes this information available to the general

public. The library collects USDA information in whatever format it is published: paper,

microfiche, digital; and has a particularly strong collection in the area of agricultural economics. Therefore, we were especially excited when an opportunity arose for the

library to collaborate with the Economic

Research Service and acquire complete sets of

their digital information.

In one agreement, the library was able to acquire hard-to-get information, and

experiment with new ways to deliver this information to citizens who might never enter an agricultural library. When we consider the

fact that we distribute over a half million full- text documents and binary data files annually from this network service, we are convinced we made the right choice. The Library Experience Mann Library's experience with the USDA

partnership has been both a challenge and a change for us. Information in a digital environment is far more dynamic than print.

In our arrangement with USDA, data is arriving

at all times during the working day. We must

frequently juggle our staff schedule in order to have staff ready to receive, review and process

the information. An added complication is that the University holiday calendar is significantly different from the Federal one, and on some of our days off we require staff to be able to process the data from their home.

155
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

Also, much of this data is time sensitive, and we have to hustle to get it posted to the network server. Almost daily there are minor

obstacles to navigate: editors miss deadlines and the information arrives late. Or Internet performance is uneven, and, not so rarely, unavailable. And sometimes we discover

small errors which need to be fixed before the data goes out.

Finally, we havejo be creative in solving access problems experienced by remote users. For example, last week I had an exchange with

user X. This person wanted a text file, but could not retrieve it with his WWW browser

for an unknown reason. We couldn't reproduce the problem with our software, but we couldn't assume this patron's problem

wasn't real. After an exchange of information with this user, I sent the file, a full 450 Kb, via e-mail. It arrived complete, he was happy, and mentioned in his thanks that he had a daughter

who graduated from Cornell. The partnership has also revolutionized our

work. In the past, we developed a top-notch system to process depository documents. With

the USDA information, we are developing a top-notch system to process digital government

information. To bridge the two we rewrote our job descriptions. Four years ago, when we loaded the first USDA data onto our server, our Information Technology (IT) personnel were afraid to give our acquisitions staff an account, much less unrestricted privileges, on the UNIX-based

network systems in the library. To solve the problem, we provided sustained, in-depth

training, purchased up-to-date equipment and

software, and re-engineered our work

processes. Today, the acquisitions staff routinely modify

both processing software and the data archive contents on those same UNIX systems, and the

IT staff are looking to transfer other library computer functions to the division. We didn't remove or replace the staff; instead, by

showing we could master digital skills, we

replaced inappropriate IT staff preconceptions.

We also rethought library functions. You

might think acquisition library assistants rarely answer reference questions. Not so with USDA information. The acquisitions staff routinely answer access and content questions from remote users.

Also, we have integrated the USDA titles into our other electronic titles on the Mann Library Gateway. The classic HTML Web page is staggering under the growing load of titles. Devising better home pages is no longer thought of as a "reference only" or "cataloging only" prerogative. Instead, it is an effort distributed throughout the library.

Finally, we are breaking down the division between librarian and programmer. We are not looking to make librarians into programmers, but we are insisting new

computing projects be designed, and the appropriate staff be trained, so that the project can reside, be upgraded and maintained at the

division level of the library. This practice was

initiated with system enhancements to the USDA system. We are also having to reconsider collaboration with other libraries. Mann Library is mostly

self-sufficient, but we're aware there is more USDA information to be managed than any one library can manage. Ultimately, much of what we do will have to complement other networked academic/USDA partnerships. We

are aware of the need to plan ahead to prevent

overlap of effort, and to guarantee that essential services are not overlooked. We

hope to facilitate the process through meetings and personal contacts. The Future We believe agency/academic partnerships

benefit both the agency and the library, but the arrangement requires periodic re-examination. Three years ago, both the library and the Economic Research Service agreed that there was a critical need to create network access to

digital information. Today, that need has been

met; indeed, the partnership has developed

excess file delivery capacity. Re-evaluation

156
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

establishes new priorities for both partners, and while It is not clear which priorities will now rise to the top, the process must take Into account changes In both technology and the

political climate In the University and

Washington.

157
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference Preservation Is Common Sense: Practical Tips for

Government Documents Collections

]ulie Arnott

Southeastern Library Network, Inc. Atlanta, GA

Introduction When I looked at the program and saw that the

great majority of the sessions cover electronic information dissemination, I worried that my

presentation might be a little out of synch with

the overall conference theme. You can imagine how heartened I was to hear David Cobb, Head of the Harvard Map Collection, emphasize in his talk this morning that while

electronic information can provide terrific access, it is only a preservation format to the extent that it reduces use of the original. The focus of my talk is not the preservation of electronic formats, but rather the preservation

of the many other, more traditional formats

that comprise our collections. How many of you have paper in your collections? Magnetic media? Microformats? LPs and CDs?

Photographic materials? I see that most of you

do. How many of you are involved in the following activities? - processing materials - shelving materials - repairing books - binding periodicals and monographs - circulating materials Once again, I see that the answer for most of you is "yes." I'm going to talk about how you

can integrate preservation into routine, ongoing activities by modifying how they are done-with an eye to the long term impact on

collections. You don't necessarily have to hire new staff or spend a lot of money to preserve your collection. There are practical.

inexpensive things that you can do to prolong

the useful life of the formats that are in your

library's collection. The first nine items on the following list comprise the traditional elements of library preservation programs. Notice that I have a question mark after "digitization." I can't emphasize enough that it won't be a preservation format until standards for data refreshment and migration are developed and

widely adopted. Elements of Preservation

• Shelf preparation

• Stack maintenance

• Environmental control

• Disaster preparedness and recovery

• Security

• Staff and user education

• Library binding

• Replacement and reformatting

• Collections conservation and conservation

treatment

Digitization(?) Today, I'm going to focus on four of these elements: shelf preparation, stack maintenance, the storage environment, and

library binding. I'll focus on common-sense,

no cost or low-cost preservation measures. My

co-presenter, Tom Clareson, will cover disaster preparation and recovery.

I'll begin by giving you a definition of

preservation. It is: The sum of the activities a library or archive

158
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

undertakes to maintain its collections in useable condition for as long as they are needed. So you can see that whatever steps you take to prolong the useful life of your collections

constitute preservation. The tips that I'm going to discuss apply to existing activities, existing workflow, and to circulating collections. The first and best tip I can give you is this: We need to stop actively abusing our collections. How do we do this?

• Eliminate or improve book drops

• Improve shelving practices

• Improve handling practices

• Change your library binding profile

• Monitor and improve the storage environment

• Change repair supplies/practices.

Before I go any further, we need to review the three major factors that affect the longevity of collection materials:

1. The chemical and physical composition of collection materials:

Collection materials are made up of organic

matter and all things that are organic

deteriorate over time. Organic materials have what we in preservation call inherent vice. What this means is that the resistance of an

article to degradation is built into it at the time

of manufacture; it is part of its nature.

Consider, for example, the paper-based

materials in your collections. Many of them

are deteriorating, right? The inherent vice is the acidic components (e.g., ground wood

pulp, chlorine bleach) that are part of the manufacturing process. Currently, some GPO

documents are printed on recycled paper, but

that paper is not yet consistently acid-free or

alkaline, so acidic paper and its associated problems will continue to be part of your documents collections.

2. The storage conditions which they are subject to:

Providing an adequate storage environment is the single most effective means of extending

the life of a collection.

3. The type, intensity and amount of handling

materials receive from staff and patrons. Because we know that often we're dealing

with less-than-sturdy, complex materials, it is important that we handle the materials

carefully. Consider it cost-effective resource management.

Care and Handling Tips for Paper-Based

Materials

Presentation concerns begin as soon as material enters the library. In fact, in order for depository libraries to comply with GPO

regulations, shipping materials (e.g. rubber

bands, shrink wrap, mailing tubes) must be removed from materials prior to shelving. The

rolled material should be stored flat. Rubber

bands must be removed because they emit

sulfuric acid as they age, and the acid is damaging to collection materials. Just taking these simple, common-sense steps will contribute to prolonging the useful life of your

collections.

Staff should be trained to recognize potential problems; to examine all material on arrival to

identify problems that might lead to rejecting

it; and to flag material for treatment so that problems (e.g., the pages pop right out of the binding) can be remedied before they get worse.

Shelf Preparation

When processing materials for the shelf, the following tips will help reduce potential damage to collection materials.

• Don't stuff bulky papers or cards between

the endpaper and cover as this will damage the binding. Instead, tie the papers to the outside of the cover with a piece of cotton tape. Don't use rubber

bands!

159
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

• Be careful when applying security strips (3M Tattle Tape®). For example, don't place double-sided adhesive Tattle Tapes

in the center of a periodical signature! The

pages may stick together and information near the margin will be unreadable.

• Place the date due slip on the flyleaf, not on the cover of the book. Placement there

will minimize damage to the book's binding when^the due date is stamped on

the slip.

• Use non-harmful supplies such as nonacidic adhesives to affix loose plates, pockets, bookplates, etc. Do not use • rubber cement! The resource list that I've provided includes

several catalogs that offer "preservation- approved" supplies such as non-acidic adhesives and cotton tape.

Stack Maintenance

Library collections spend the majority of their existence sitting on shelves, so the conditions they are subject to there have a great impact on their longevity. Much damage can be avoided by training the shelvers to use proper

techniques. Heavily-used areas of the stacks should be given extra attention. Heavy

volumes should be shelved upright, and

adequately supported with bookends. If you

lack adequate storage for oversized volumes, do not shelve them on the fore-edge. Over

time, the force of gravity will pull the pages

out of the cover and the volume will need to be repaired or rebound. Instead, change the

location of the call number or SuDoc label to the upper right-hand corner of the front cover and shelve the volume on its spine. Commonsense shelving practices can save money by

reducing both repair and library binding costs. Care and Handling Tips for Non-Print Formats Magnetic media

• Avoid tape erasers, storage near electric

lines, fluorescent lights, magnets, electrical

nodes.

• Store vertically, supported on both sides.

• Replace the original boxes with nonharmful containers.

• Make back-ups and migrate to newer

formats.

• "Exercise" videotapes every 6-1 2 months.

• Store videotape in the "played" position to minimize print-through and sticking.

• Never play the masters! Make use copies.

LPs and CDs

• Store vertically, supported top to bottom,

front to back, and handle by the edges.

• Clean LP's in a circular motion NOT across

the grooves.

• Clean CD's across the grooves.

• Clean both with clean, soft, lint-free cotton

velvet cloth.

• Keep playback equipment clean and in good condition.

• Minimize exposure to light. • Use appropriate storage containers. Check

the catalogs on the resource list! • Keep spare needles on hand for record

players. Microformats

• Handle film and fiche by the edges; oily finger prints will damage the film's surface.

• Store in non-acidic, unbuffered boxes and

envelopes.

• Keep reading equipment clean and in good

condition to avoid scratching and abrading

the film's surface. Photographic Materials

• Handle by the edges; oily fingerprints will damage the surface of prints and negatives.

• Limit light exposure for color and early black-and-white prints. • Store and display prints using acid-free, unbuffered materials.

• Store prints and negatives separately in acid-free, unbuffered sleeves.

• Check the supply catalogs on the resource

list for appropriate storage and display

160
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

materials. Environmental Control Remember, this is the least expensive per-item preservation strategy. It is the single most

effective means of extending the useful life of a

collection. I'm going to talk about temperature and relative humidity (RH) "ideals" for circulating collections. The recommended

standards outlined below can be difficult to maintain; the main thing to remember is to avoid fluctuation in temperature and RH.

High temperature can hasten embrittlement and accelerate deterioration by increasing the speed of chemical reactions. All organic

materials containing moisture respond to the ambient moisture content by changing shape

or size. Absorbing and expelling moisture

accelerates the deterioration of collection

materials. High relative humidity also accelerates the chemical reactions that cause

deterioration, and it encourages mold growth and pests. Molds common to paper and books will flourish in conditions above 70% RH. Low

relative humidity can cause desiccation and

embrittlement. So maintenance of stable temperature and RH will contribute to prolonging the useful life of collections. Consider this: ail other conditions being equal,

a paper-based collection stored at 60 degrees F will endure twice as long in usable condition

as one stored at 78 degrees F. Recommended temperature and relative humidity for circulating paper-based

collections: 68-72 degrees F and 40-55% RH

Recommended temperature and relative humidity for use collections of microformats,

magnetic media, LPs and CDs:

70 degrees F and 50% RH

Recommended temperature and relative humidity for circulating collections of

photographic prints: < 70 degrees F and 35%-50% RH

Some practical solutions for maintaining a proper storage environment include:

• Turn off lights when the area is not in use.

• Close blinds or curtains.

• Avoid fluctuations in temperature and

relative humidity.

• Use portable dehumidifiers as necessary.

• Improve air circulation with fans.

• Make sure existing systems are functioning

properly and are maintained (e.g., air filters are changed on a regular basis). A Few Words about Photographic Negatives:

Cellulose nitrate was the film base used between 1889 and 1939. It is extremely flammable (call the Fire Department to handle any you have in your collection) and should be copied immediately onto polyester-based

film. Cellulose acetate has been used since

1 932. When it degrades it emits a strong vinegar smell. Copy degraded acetate film onto polyester, which is the most stable film base. It has been in use since the mid-1 960's.

• Store negatives separately from prints.

• Keep in mind that color negatives are unstable and should be kept in cold, dark

storage (39 degrees F).

Library Binding

How many of you have had formal instruction, either through workshops or in library school, on library binding? Have any of you ever

toured a library bindery? I'm not surprised that many of you have not. Library binding is an

activity that we do need to pay attention to and

learn about because it is likely one of the

largest line items in your materials' budget.

For many institutions, it is the largest amount

of funds spent on a preservation activity. Along with the environment, it widely affects the physical condition of volumes in our

collections. With my very brief introduction to 161
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference one aspect of it today, I hope to set you on the road to becoming better consumers of library binders' products.

First of all, you need to understand leaf attachment methods, the processes that fasten the leaves (pages) to each other to form a text block. The leaves are attached with adhesive

or with sewing thread. Drawings of leaf attachment methods, along with more detailed

descriptions, can be found in the Library Binding Institute Standard for Library Binding,

8th ed., and the Guide to the Library Binding

Institute for Library Binding cited on the resource list. There are advantages and disadvantages to each type. When choosing one, the most

important thing to consider is whether or not it is appropriate for the volume that needs

rebinding or for the binding unit that needs

first-time binding. Keep in mind how the bound volume will be used. A brief description of leaf attachment methods

follows. Recasing

This is an option that library binders provide, but it is not actually a leaf attachment method.

Recasing is a good choice when a volume with

a sewn textblock, with the sewing intact, needs

a new cover. None of the inner margin is lost with recasing.

Sew-through-the-fold

This leaf attachment method can be done by machine or by hand. The library binder may

choose hand-sewing instead of machine- sewing depending on the limitations of the machinery, and on the thickness of the paper. The most likely candidates for this leaf attachment method are periodical issues that are published in single signature formats, such

as Time or Newsweek. Volumes that have been sewn-through-the-fold are easy to read and photocopy because they will lay flat when

open. None of the inner margin is lost with

sewing-through-the-fold.

Double-fan adhesive

This method is appropriate for both monographs and periodicals with single sheet pages (i.e., not in signatures). The spine is milled to ensure that all of the page edges

along the spine are in single sheet format. Notching of the spine may be done to increase

surface area for adhesion, particularly for coated paper. The text block is fanned in one

direction and a layer of adhesive is applied, then fanned in the other and another layer is applied. The quality of the adhesive is very

important. The current Standard specifies the use of PVA (polyvinyl acetate), a non-acidic adhesive that does not become embrittled with

age. Double-fan adhesive bound volumes

have minimal margin loss, and are easy to read and photocopy because they lay flat when

open. Oversewing

This method is used to sew single sheets together into a textblock. Oversewing has a negative impact on a volume's flexibility, on how well it opens and stays open. It requires

at least 5/8 of an inch of inner margin; how

many monographs and periodicals have you

seen with an inner margin this generous? The

paper along the inner margin is perforated (and weakened) by the needles and thread during

the process, and the sewing structure intrudes so far into the margin that it is virtually impossible for the volume to lay flat when

open. It is a secure method of leaf attachment

that can be used when the textblock is two or more inches thick. But there is a more userfriendly, preservation-approved option: split volumes thicker than 2 inches into two binding

units and have them double-fan adhesive bound. The result will be volumes that lay flat when open so they are much easier to use and

will suffer less damage at the photocopier!

Sidesewing You often see this leaf attachment method

used in children's books. It is suitable for textblocks less than 1/2 inch thick. Like oversewing, it perforates the binding edge and

162
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

requires a substantive 3/4 inch inner margin.

Sidesewing reduces flexibility and makes

volumes difficult to use because they will not

lay flat when open. Here again, double-fan adhesive binding is the preferred option both

in terms of preservation and the library user.

I've barely touched the tip of the iceberg in terms of library binding. Additional factors that affect the useful life of collections include rounding and backing, endpapers, book

boards, book cloths, spine linings, etc. These

processes and materials are defined in the

library binding publications on the resource

list. I encourage you to look at them. I should mention that the 9th edition of the Standard for Library Binding is currently in the works but I don't know the expected publication date.

I hope that you can now see that presenilation

is not necessarily an expensive or elaborate set of activities that only really big institutions need or can afford. Much of it really is just common sense.

Brief Resource List

Further Reading

Merrill-Oldham, Jan and Paul Parisi. Guide to the Library Binding Institute for Library Binding. Chicago: American Library Association, 1990.

Parisi, Paul A. and Jan Merrill-Oldham, ed.. Library Binding Institute Standard for Library Binding. Rochester, NY: Library Binding

Institute, 1986.

St.-Laurent, Gilles. The Care and Handling of Recorded Sound Materials. Washington, DC: Commission on Preservation and Access, September 1991. Rempel, Siegfried. The Care of Photographs.

New York, NY: Nick Lyons Books, 1987. Van Bogart, Dr. John W. C. Magnetic Tape

Storage and Handling: A Guide for Libraries and Archives. Washington, DC: Commission

on Preservation and Access; St. Paul, MN:

National Media Laboratory, June 1995.

Supply Catalogs The following suppliers offer a wide range of preservation-quality supplies: Gaylord Archival Storage Materials &

Conservation Supplies To order, call: (800) 448-6160 To speak with a professional consen/ator, call the Preservation Help Line Thursdays and

Fridays: (800) 423-3631

Light Impressions: good resource for materials

for photographic storage To order, call: (800) 828-6216

University Products Archival Quality Materials To order, call: (800)-628-1 91

2

163
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference Emergency Preparedness and Recovery

Thomas F.R. Clareson

AMIGOS Bibliographic Council, Inc. Dallas, TX

I want to ask three questions, as I do every time at the beginning of a talk dealing with emergency preparedness:

First, how many of your institutions have a plan to deal with disasters and emergencies? Can I have a show of hands? Now, how many of your institutions have

experienced an emergency or disaster during

the time you have been there, where books

have been destroyed?

Finally, how many of you have ever been

involved in a library disaster, even if it was at an institution where you previously worked? When people are talking about preservation of

library and archival materials, they seem to use

the terminology "disaster" and "emergency"

almost interchangeably. I consider an event

that harms even one item or patron an emergency, because if that single item is burned or drenched, it is certainly an emergency for that item! A disaster, to me, is a larger occurrence, which

can affect hundreds of books, your whole

library, or, as in the case with earthquakes,

hurricanes, tornadoes, and other natural disturbances, your whole community. Some disaster scenarios which have recently occurred in libraries in the United States include:

• A burst pipe on December 26 when a reduced number of staff was working at the

library.

• A fire which started in the early morning

hours and had consumed much of the

library by daybreak.

• The late-evening tornadoes which struck two Texas towns, including their libraries and city halls, in 1994.

• A bomb threat which happened while the

library was open, necessitating a complete

evacuation.

• A gang fight which took place in the library because it was considered the center of town. Management Concerns in Library Disasters

Let me talk about a management and

administration-oriented way to react to

situations like the ones mentioned above. There are five main steps which you should

consider. ASSIGN. The first step in planning for combating a disaster is to realize that you

cannot battle it on your own. There are key

roles for the staff of the library to play in a

disaster situation, but you do not want to be

the only person on staff familiar enough with your building, disaster recovery practices, and

important resource people.

I suggest that you ASSIGN a team of your

department managers and other interested staff to collect information for disaster planning at your institution, draft a disaster plan, and set up situations when disaster practices or drills can take place.

Next, MONITORING is important. This word

has a variety of meanings in the preservation

164
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

context. First of all, it means monitoring the environment of the library -such factors as temperature, relative humidity, light, and

pollutants. A high level of one of these factors,

or, worse yet, a combination of environmental

problems, can be responsible for such disasters as a mold outbreak or an invasion of pests! So, monitoring the environment for stable temperatures between 65 and 70 degrees

Fahrenheit, and relative humidity around 40- 50%, will help lessen the chances of these kinds of disasters. MONITORING the external environment is helpful, too. How many of your libraries are located near busy streets or highways? Do you know if hazardous chemicals are allowed to be

transported on these roads? Is your facility near a wooded area, and, if so, do you keep

track of the fire warnings which are posted for wooded areas? Knowing the environment of the area where you are located is very

important. ORIENTING your staff AND USERS to your

facility-through exit signage, visible placement

of fire extinguishers, and practice of disaster evacuation and recovery procedures for the

staff is an important step. Many libraries feel that they have reached a milestone when they

get a disaster plan down on paper. However,

a "theoretical" disaster plan, one which is not

practiced and updated annually, is almost

worthless. A disaster plan is an "always- changing, always-improvable document," as most of the improvements are made as the

result of practice. COMMUNICATE. There are various "Disaster Team Players," who can assist in the event of a

library emergency. I have emphasized the importance of spreading the work among a number of individuals. However, I believe

that when communicating about a disaster, the top administrator should be the point person who talks with the public and the press. And, because comments are open to so many forms

of interpretation, I suggest that rather than

verbal communication with the press, written statements or press releases can be a very

effective method of sending the same message

out to a number of media outlets. You will also want to be communicating with other

librarians, and other top administrators in your community in the post-disaster phase, in order

to line up support for your reopening plans.

Finally, COOPERATE. Because you are involved in the library community, where a concern for our recorded heritage is so

important, you are linked to a group of professionals who will understand the basic

activities and needs of your institutions. You may want to start right now to develop

reciprocal borrowing policies, off site locations

for library services, and multi-library disaster teams with nearby libraries.

So, these are some of the management

functions which you may want to undertake at your institution, both prior to a disaster in the planning stages, and during and after an emergency.

There are two chief areas of concern in a

disaster situation which require the attention of the top administrator: human and financial. The HUMAN concern should be your main

focus. No matter how valuable your collection or building is, your chief concern in a disaster

situation should be the safety of your patrons and staff. Informing people of exit routes, making sure that those routes and the public

areas of the building allow handicapped

people to enter and exit, and practicing evacuation with the assistance of public safety

officials are all methods to deal with this top

area of concern. The FINANCIAL concerns mainly center around how you might replace the materials in your library if they are damaged or destroyed

during an emergency. Does your library have INSURANCE, or some reserve of money to replace books, furniture, or even the building

in which your collection is housed? What type

of risks are covered? Fire? Water?

Explosions? Theft? Civil Disturbances? Are

"Acts of God "-extreme natural disturbances, such as floods, windstorms, hail and snow, or earthquakes-covered? The most frequent cause of damage to library materials is water,

165
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

so a financial plan for the protection of documents in the case of worn pipes bursting, or sewers backing up, is important. You

should also determine if your insurance or reserve money will simply pay for replacement

of materials, or whether it will also cover cost of recovery, personnel costs, or special

restoration procedures. Having a written POLICY about the steps to take, people to contact, and costs to expect in the event of an emergency is important.

Steps in Disaster Planning

PLANNING AND PRIORITIZATION are areas which you can start on today, but which must

be completed successfully for disaster recovery

to be possible. There are five main steps to the disaster planning process which I would like to cover:

1. Establish Authority You must first establish authority, so that someone in the library, either the director or the "team leader," has control of personnel, equipment, and financial resources when and

if a disaster strikes. This person must be in the

position to make many quick decisions on the monies to be spent, staff or services to be used, and methods to be used in the recovery.

2. Establish a Disaster Planning and

Recovery Team

The second step is to establish a disaster planning and recovery TEAM. This group of

staff people in your library will work together

to study the library building, the collection, and the roles of library staff in the recovery

process. As I explained earlier, you do not simply want to have one person assigned to recovery. There are some "rules" of the

disasters I have worked with that make it very important to have a team to respond to a

disaster, as well as BACKUP people for each

role on the disaster team (which I will explain

in a moment). The rules of the disasters-what we call "Murphy's Laws"-are that they will always happen on weekends, when there is

not much staff at the library, and that they

often happen at holiday time, when team members are out of town! The team members which I would suggest you

have include:

• THE TEAM LEADER: This is the person we

spoke of who has the role of authority. The team leader will coordinate the team, make financial decisions, make insurance

contacts, and handle publicity and public

relations.

• THE RECOVERY MANAGER: This is a staff member who is knowledgeable of disaster recovery procedures, develops specific recovery procedures for your library, and

trains staff and volunteers on how to recover collection materials.

• THE CREW AND BUILDING MANAGER

assembles and coordinates work crews, whether they are from your library, from

volunteer groups, or from a commercial

disaster recovery operation. This person

also controls workflow and supplies, and

keeps all building-related records and

materials, such as blueprints and floor

plans.

• One of the most important, but often overlooked, jobs is that of the RECORDER.

This person keeps inventory records of all of the damaged materials. This can be

very important, because people often move quickly in disaster situations to get books out of the library, and the recorder

has the responsibility to make sure the books get back INTO the library in order

so they can be put back on shelves in correct order. At one library which was hit by a tornado, the RECORDER said it took

only three hours for people to remove the

materials from the library, but it took three months to get them back on the shelf in the

correct order! This team member also keeps track of all of the information generated by the recovery team.

• Finally, the COMMUNICATIONS

166
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

MANAGER commands the control center

for communication, which often may be by

other means than telephone, if the

electrical power is out. This person also communicates with outside resources, and

deals with all incoming and outgoing calls.

3. Assess the Risks Assembling the Disaster Team and assigning them to specific roles may take a good deal of time. Once you have established the team, however, they can go directly to work to ASSESS the risks in your institution. I often think of this as "preventive medicine" against a

disaster. The first step of assessing the risk of a disaster

is to do what I call an "EMERGENCY

HISTORY." This is like a case history a doctor would do. The doctor may ask you if the risk of a certain ailment runs in your family; the

disaster team asks if there is a history of roof

leaks at your library, and then might identify that as a top risk for a disaster. This type of "HISTORICAL STUDY" of disasters at your

library-writing down the details you can remember of any disaster or emergency, and

then asking other staff to add details-can help you to try to correct problems, and protect from future occurrences as best as possible. The team will then move on from finding out about past disasters which may have happened

to assessing the risk of future disasters. They do this by looking at two things: the location of your library, including its geographic location, and the building condition. Some of the questions the team may want to ask about the

library's location are meant to determine if there is a strong possibility of severe weather,

flooding, fire, pests, hazardous materials,

radiation, chemical, or transportation accidents around your facility, or if bomb threats or

terrorism might be a possible problem.

When the team studies the risks of your library

facility or building, they may look to see if the building has a damaged or leaky roof, clogged

or damaged gutters or drains, old plumbing

and pipes, an unmaintained heating system.

faulty or inadequate wiring, and look to see if the library has smoke or heat detectors or fire suppression systems such as hoses or

sprinklers. If the team identifies problems with

the facilities, these may need to be repaired in order to ensure that the building condition does not cause a disaster. Again, when

assessing the condition of the facilities, it is very important to look at areas including

architecture, drainage, protection from fire, protection from water, heating/ventilation,

security, housekeeping and general

cleanliness, and any building, renovation, or construction projects which may be underway.

4. Develop and Implement a Written

Disaster Plan

At this point, the Disaster Team is ready to develop and implement a written disaster plan. The plan should include a listing of phone

numbers of Disaster Team members and other important people at the institution; location of emergency systems such as keys, first aid kits, fire extinguishers, and water and gas shutoffs; emergency services outside of the library; supplies used in salvage of the collections, and

a list of SALVAGE PRIORITIES.

Establishing these SALVAGE PRIORITIES is the most difficult part of planning. In the event

that a large-scale emergency DOES happen, your decisions to salvage certain materials ahead of others will be critical. Many wet

materials have only 48 hours before mold

growth, which can cause irreparable harm,

will begin. Other limitations to your salvage

efforts can include time restraints by public

safety officials, who may not let you into a

facility because of dangerous conditions, space

limitations for air-drying or freezing of

materials, or quantity limitations because of a large amount of damage to the collections. A

pre-planned list of salvage priorities will help ensure that your efforts in the critical first hours

after a disaster will be directed toward saving your most valuable collections and records,

instead of replaceable, low-value materials.

Priorities should be based upon the following

concepts:

167
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

a. Is the material critical for the ongoing

operations of the institution-that is, is it vital personnel, financial, or collection inventory information without which

your library could no longer function?

b. Is it available in another format or another collection? Can it be replaced? Would the replacement cost be more

or less than the cost of restoration?

c. Does the material have a high or low

collection value or priority-that is, is it a rare and important document, which

is one of the prize pieces of the

collection?

d. Is it made of material which, because

of its composition, would require immediate salvage attention? Materials including coated paper, vellum, or water-soluble inks are among the

materials to consider for immediate

salvage. You should attempt to get at least the basic

priorities of the institution on paper before a

disaster happens. The chaotic time during and

immediately after a disaster is not the time to

try to remember what decisions you have made!

5. Practice Your Disaster Plan The last step is a reminder to practice your

disaster plan often: at least once a year, so that everyone remembers their role in a disaster!

Let us say that, even though you have done a

great deal of planning, your library is struck by

a disaster - a leak from a heavy rainstorm, or a

fire, for example.

Mitigation

Mitigation is a term used for the action you

take during and immediately after a disaster to lessen or mitigate the damage caused by the

event. Your preparedness, quick thinking, and

response here are crucial.

As you know from reading about, or being

involved in, crisis situations, they are a chain

of events, not a single, isolated incident. When faced with a recovery or salvage

situation in the wake of an emergency or

disaster, you need to take all of the planning, preparedness, and practice you have had, and

try to bring order into a chaotic situation.

First of all, as much as you may want to, DO

NOT enter your building until it has been

declared safe by public safety officials. You do

not want to risk your life, or risk arrest for entering the site before police or fire officials have declared that it is safe to enter the facility.

It may be a while before you are let into the

facility, particularly if a continuing fire hazard,

electrical hazard, or contamination, such as

radiation, chemicals, or asbestos, exists. One

way to make use of this frustrating down time

is to chart a course of action for recovery. You

can contact staff and external assistance providers about their roles in the recovery; contact your insurance carrier or financial administrator and gather salvage and financial resources so that you can do as much good as possible, as quickly as possible, once you are allowed to enter the building. Once you ARE allowed to enter the facility, don't rush in when disaster strikes, ASSESS the damage first. Make sure you have a pencil (not a pen, which

might accidentally mark material permanently) and paper as you walk through the library

facility. Having a camera is also an important way to document the situation. Insurers suggest that you don't touch anything at this point, but that may be difficult if you see one

of your prized possessions lying face down,

open, in standing water. Whatever you do

during this initial walk-through, try to leave the

site in as close to the condition as you find it so that your insurance representative can see

it, or, if they do not need to see the damage

first-hand, take photographs to document the

specific damage and begin recovery.

168
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings You will want to take some particular steps in rather quick succession here:

1 . First, ASSESS the damage. Some particular points to look for are how much material has been affected. Is it a few books, a stack range, or the whole library? What

kind of damage has occurred - has fire, water, or mud and sewage entered the

library? Finally, what type of material has been affected? Coated paper? Uncoated

paper? Media?

2. Secondly, STABILIZE the environment. Get the standing water out of the facility. Measure temperature and relative humidity levels, and try to bring them to the recommended levels of 65-70 degrees

Fahrenheit, and 40-50% relative humidity. You may need to use fans or dehumidifiers for this, and these can also help later, in salvage activities. In the worst of situations, you may need

generators and other reserve power

sources to run the fans and dehumidifiers.

3. CLEAN the area. You may need to wear

hip boots, rubber or cotton gloves, and

provide face masks for those people

working on the recovery, especially if standing water, mud, or sewage is present. Consider fumigation of the facility, and be sure

to pull up and remove any wet carpeting, which is a breeding ground for mold. Be

especially certain to remove the carpet backing, and check to make sure any carpeting under shelves is removed, as well.

At any point during this series of activities, depending on the value of the material

affected, SALVAGE PROCEDURES may need

to begin, so you need to decide how much

help you can get from your staff, volunteers, and other librarians in your region, or if an

external disaster recovery service may need to be called in.

I believe that emergencies which affect up to 200 items can be handled in the space and by

the staff of a library. For events larger than

that, you may want to consider calling in disaster recovery experts and commercial

firms. In my final comments, I am going to

talk about what library staff can do in both

small and large-scale emergencies and

disasters to dry their books and records. Recovery Methods

At this point, I want to give you some brief definitions of the various methods used to dry wet book and paper materials which have been damaged in a library disaster-via flooding, a pipe leak, or even in the aftermath

of a fire, when fire personnel may have used water to douse flames. Two major methods exist for drying materials:

air drying, which can be done on-site if space and labor allows, and what I have termed

"machine-assisted drying" which can be done

via vacuum-drying or vacuum freeze-drying.

A. Air Drying

Let me begin by discussing air drying. It is accomplished by passing heated or room

temperature air over the surface of wet

materials. The moving air absorbs and carries

off the moisture. This method can be done

using fans, and, if the air is particularly moist,

also using dehumidification machines. Books

are stood upright on a layer of blotter or other absorbent paper, and turned upside-down

when the paper becomes too soaked to absorb more water.

This is a space and labor-intensive drying

method, which works well for small quantities

of damp, but not soaked books. If the book is extremely wet, air drying may be too slow of a drying method, and may allow moisture to remain in the book long enough to cause

swelling and distortion of the textblock and

covers, as well as the growth of mold. I consider 200 as the maximum number of books to be handled by this method.

B. Freezing Materials - An Interim Step

For both slightly-moist materials which will be

169
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

air-dried at a later date, or thoroughly soaked

materials which will undergo machine-assisted

drying, freezing, whether it is done in an

institutional freezer or a freezer truck, can be a worthwhile interim step. It can buy you time

to gather the supplies you need for air-drying, and lets you treat smaller groups of affected books when it is convenient for you to do so.

If freezing is done as a step before machineassisted drying, it will allow you time to contact a vendor, arrange transportation, and

find funding to have materials treated. Those

materials which exhibit mold growth can be

frozen, since freezing halts the spread of mold.

C. Vacuum Freeze-Drying

This method works by causing ice crystals in frozen material to go directly from a solid state

(ice crystals) to vapor, without becoming liquid again. By avoiding the "water-state," the harmful effects of distortion and mold have

less of a chance to take place. Books and papers are loaded into a freeze drying chamber, which is sealed. Pressure is then lowered to create a continuous vacuum.

Then, the temperature is raised slowly and

slightly in the chamber, to allow the ice to turn

into vapor. The vapor is then attracted to panels in the machine, and when it contacts these panels, it becomes ice again.

This process can take from two days to over two weeks, depending on how wet the

material was initially, what type of material it is, and the type of freeze-drying equipment

used. What librarians can do in the case of materials needing freeze-drying is to wrap the books in freezer-paper (from the butcher shop), and

pack them loosely in milk cartons or boxes to allow them to undergo freeze-drying at a commercial facility.

Active mold can be killed by this method, but

if materials are moved back into an

uncontrolled environment again, the mold may become reactivated. Also in this process, some physical expansion of the items may

occur, and some decrease in adhesive and

paper strength may also result.

D. Vacuum Drying

This process, also known as thermal vacuum

drying, thaws frozen material, then removes

moisture by a vacuum process. A chamber is loaded with material; a vacuum is created, and

temperature is decreased to freezing. Then,

hot and dry air is introduced, and, after picking up moisture from the materials, is pumped out

of the chamber. This continuous process is repeated until materials are dry.

This process is effective for newspapers, loose, non-archival papers, and some general

collections materials, but should not be used on rare materials or coated paper because books do pass through a wet stage when hot

air is introduced, which can re-damage the

items. In addition, heat processes speed up

aging of materials. Vacuum-drying can also be done on-site, with

materials in place, via desiccant drying. Moist

air is pumped out of a section or all of your

building, and dry air is introduced. This method is best for moist or slightly damp

items. My purpose today has been to introduce you

to the elements of emergency preparedness and recovery, and to immerse you in the first steps of the planning process. This is a very broad area of preservation, with many specific areas of knowledge needed, but preparedness and recovery in the event of a disaster IS manageable.

This presentation is adapted from a workshop,

"Emergency Preparedness and Recovery," developed by Thomas F.R. Clareson and Ann

M. Massmann, April, 1994. "Recovery Methods" section of this document is adapted

from "Drying Wet Books and Records," a technical leaflet by Sally Buchanan in Preservation of Library & Archival Materials-A Manual, Northeast Document Conservation

Center, 1994.

170
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

Preservation Planning for Permanent Public

Access to Paper-Based Collections

Irene Schubert

Library of Congress Washington, DC

I am delighted to be here and to have the opportunity to talk with documents librarians. My first position as a full-fledged librarian managing a Federal depository collection was

invaluable experience, as it essentially involved all aspects of library management.

However, I must admit that preservation was at the bottom of my priorities as a novice.

Several years later, in northwestern Ohio, I decided to apply some of my knowledge of Government publications in a history class by

writing a paper on the popular and long-lived document entitled Infant Care. Infant Care was

first published in 1914 and has been revised and updated through its latest edition published in 1989. As the second publication

in the Children's Bureau "Care of Children

Series," it was intended to distill the latest scientific and medical information on how best

to care for babies through their first year of life. Not only has Infant Care been continuously

revised and updated, this 67 to 135-page document has been shamelessly reprinted by commercial publishers.

So, it seemed like a good research project to examine attitudes of professionals about women, their roles in infant care and the role of fathers in infant care and development. I also thought it would be a project which would require a minimum of work to obtain my primary source material. The first step in this project was to examine all revisions, which became a problem in distinguishing between reprintings, editions and revisions. This bibliographer's problem was tangential but became important to my

project. My real problem was in locating

enough of the nine printing dates identified in distinct bibliographic records to identify

significant revisions. I ultimately had to use

the documents collections of three universities and one public library to get what was still an incomplete set of versions of Infant Care.

All the libraries had old editions of Infant Care,

so I was fairly certain that missing copies had

not been deliberately weeded out of the

collections, although some may have been

discarded because they had been damaged. None of the copies I found had been bound or were in any protective enclosure, although all were in various states, from tattered and falling apart to fairly good condition.

I bring this example to you to consider a number of issues about preservation.

Selection for Preservation The first is selection for preservation. Your

Instructions to Depository Libraries and the

Federal Depository Library Manual (which would have made my life much easier 30

years ago) deals with the matter of what I call up-front selection and prevention of preservation problems quite thoroughly. Most

of us assume that what we select for our

collections will somehow be preserved

forever. Although selective depository

libraries do have the opportunity to weed after five years, they do retain some documents

"permanently." But generally, whether we

weed or not, we expect materials selected for our collections to be there when a client or

constituent wants them, to be there in useable

condition, with no information lost due to mutilation, damage, or deterioration. 171
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference We need to re-select materials for preservation

as our collections get older. And we need to plan for a systematic process for this re- selection. Generally there are two distinct ways of planning for re-selection for preservation, with variations which include components of both. Use-Driven Preservation Program Planning

One method is use-driven. Clearly some of the copies of Iniant Care I examined had been

used and returned to the shelf in poor

condition. Use-driven preservation plans have

several components: decisions for treatment,

identification of items for treatment, resources

for treatment.

Decisions for Treatment

Every time you review a document for preservation you are making a deliberate decision to keep it. Every damaged document

not reviewed is a potential discard.

Policies on Selection You will need to review collection development or selection policies. Do they provide guidance on re-selection for preservation? Do they need to? How will you

apply the policies to decisions to treat or replace materials because of their condition?

Will the cost of treatment or replacement affect the decision to keep a damaged item? Who

will make the decision? You will find that the

benefits of engaging your clients, such as

faculty, in making preservation decisions go beyond public relations or good will. For

instance, they may become advocates to support your preservation program and they

will handle documents more carefully. Treatments for Preservation These decisions for treatment include repair, protective enclosure, binding or rebinding,

deacidification, conseni'ation, replacement.

And, of course, a combination of these treatments may be necessary to preserve an

item. / ..

Repairs of materials can be highly cost

effective. I recommend SOLINET'S Web site^ for "Readings and Manuals on Book Repair." You may find that another unit in your library performs these tasks. Protective enclosures may be considered a part of repair or an

alternative to repair. SOLINET identifies several works in the same list which discuss

the use and application of protective enclosure

to preserve books.

Binding or rebinding should be negotiated with other binding operations in your library if you do not work directly with a binder. We

have found that staff needs to be aware of the condition of the text block when making a preservation decision to bind or rebind.

Deacidification at a production level is a new

option for preservation. The Library of Congress is applying this preservation treatment for 50,000 books this fiscal year. See LC's Web site, "Deacidification Update,"^

for more information and links to other

information. The Conservation OnLine

(CoOL) Website also has a "Mass

Deacidification" page with I inks.

Replacement of damaged materials includes

acquisition of copies in better condition,

reprints or microforms, and preservation microfilming or photocopying. I think those of you with experience know how to exploit your

regional depositories as well as your

colleagues on the Internet in trying to find

"free" replacement copies. Your order departments should have good resources for identifying copies or reprints for sale. These same departments should have good resources both in paper and online for identifying microform copies of items to be replaced. Custom preservation microfilming will be much more expensive. The Research Library Group and the American Library Association have good guides on how to create presentation microfilm and how to establish and manage a presen^'ation microfilm

program.'' Many libraries contract out for microfilming services.

172
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

Preservation photocopying is an option which

is very attractive for reference books. See LC's Web site, "Guidelines for Preservation Photocopying,"^ and the ALA and National Archives guidelines for presentation photocopying.^ Again, libraries usually contract out for preservation photocopying.

Identification of Items for Treatment

People who handle items in your collections discover documents which they think need

preservation treatment. These people include your users, your staff and other library staff. A use-driven program is based on the systematic examination of any item removed

from the shelf or files. Staff who reshelve or

refile materials should, as part of this task, examine all items for damage and condition. Users may also be encouraged to bring documents that need attention to the staff. You should provide guidelines to staff on how

to examine materials for presentation treatment and sort materials in need of treatment. These

decisions for treatment may run the gamut

from repairing tears to rebinding to replacement. You will need to determine resources, e.g.,

staff, available to perform treatments or the

labor-intensive actions preliminary to replacement. Are there library staff in other departments who can perform this work,

integrating documents into their workflow? What will be the effect of increased workloads from the documents collection? What training

will be necessary to bring staff up to speed?

Who will do the training? Do you have adequate funding for additional staff or for contracting for some or all of the presenilation actions? What supplies or equipment will you

need to acquire? The advantage of a use-driven preservation program is that the items which are used are

treated. The fact that a title or issue was used once increases the odds that it will be used

again. Studies seem to show persistently that 80% of our collections are never used. Usedriven preservation treatment/replacement

planning is a good use of limited resources. A disadvantage of a use-driven program is that you have no control over the workflow to treat documents needing preservation action and

other workload cycle peaks may coincide with peak intake of documents needing

preservation treatments.

Collection Assessment Survey Preservation Program

Staff conduct collection or condition assessment surveys for damaged items and

carry out preservation treatments. This method

is recommended for microform collections, with a standard for sampling collections

periodically as well as criteria for conditions

assessments.^ While the standard is specific to

silver-gelatin microforms, the techniques in the standard could be applied to surveys of diazo

microforms.

Paper-based collections surveys may be conducted on all items, although sample

surveys can be conducted to determine the degree and kinds of damage for planning

purposes. Northeast Document Conservation Center (NEDCC) will perform surveys. NEDCC provides some basic information about item-by-item surveys and offers a technical leaflet, "What an Institution Can Do

to Surrey its Own Collections," at its Web

site.^

Condition assessments can be combined with

inventories, but this complicates and slows down inventories. Inventories are important to preservation programs because if you don't know where it is, you can't preserve it! I am

fairly certain that I was not the first to be

disappointed in not finding a certain printing or version of Infant Care. But those who have combined inventory and condition assessments seldom recommend it to others. Conducting a pilot program to check out

results with combined and separate passes through the collections may help you

determine whether a combined run is a real cost saver. Follow-up on results of an

173
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

inventoty and the results of a condition assessment survey create different workflows and workloads and these tasks should be

considered before you make a decision. Some

libraries have conducted condition assessments in combination with systematic cleaning of shelves and materials quite

successfully. The survey method with follow-up actions

requires the same decision making and

implementation_planning as a use-driven program. A benefit of a condition assessment

survey for preservation treatment or replacement is that the manager can control the time and workload, based on cycles of other workload demands and availability of

staff to conduct the surveys and perform timely treatments or actions for replacements. For

instance, acquisitions staff may have more time

to search for the availability of replacement

copies during certain times in the budget

cycle. Managers can plan for segmented

assessments based on availability of resources

for both the assessments and actions. Contractors or volunteers may be available and

suitable to conduct the surveys. Surveys can

provide good statistical data on preservation needs to support requests for additional funding for preservation. The drawback for these surveys is that you may develop backlogs

of items selected for treatment or replacement

if you don't have a good balance between staff doing the surveys and those performing the

treatments. Don't ask the question, "does this document need preservation treatment" if you

cannot answer "Yes, and it will be treated promptly." Inadequate resources to fix problems may result in frustration and lack of

credibility in a preservation program. Condition assessment surveys provide you an

opportunity for intensive training of staff to exercise judgment in making preliminary

sorting decisions on what materials need

preservation treatment and the kinds of treatment they need. Trainers or supervisors can review a lot of decisions in a short period

of time and provide prompt feedback to staff. You can combine these two methods.

performing use-driven preservation treatments while conducting condition assessments and

carrying preservation treatments resulting from

the assessment. You could determine which

parts of the collections are most heavily used and conduct condition assessments in them

first.

Ideally, then, all editions or revisions of Infant Care would have been on the shelf in my

university's library if it had an established

preservation program.

Ah, but you ask, what about those which were

missing? Security and preservation are inseparable in a good collection management

program. Inventories and shelf reading are

part of our equation for preservation. Items which are really missing need to go into the re- selection/replacement loop used for those

items so damaged that they need to be

replaced. And, security is also part of prevention for preservation. As the Instructions to Depository

Libraries suggests, prevention of damage or unauthorized borrowing is an important

responsibility of the depository librarian as the custodian of Federal property. The library staff are absolutely critical to an effective program

for security and preservation. Staff should be

trained in the best practices for handling and

storing materials, to assist and instruct users in the best ways to handle documents. Staff should also be taught to observe how users are handling and photocopying documents and to be alert to users who may be mutilating or removing documents when not authorized to do so. Police or other officials who will respond to a staff report of theft or mutilation may need to be coached on how to respond and the importance of their involvement.

Periodic reviews of procedures with staff and

police collaborating are useful. Award or recognize those staff who reported unauthorized borrowing or mutilation of

material. When my son. Max, was in first grade, he was

very excited about an introductory tour to the

school's library. I was quite interested in his

174
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

account of this formal introduction to what he

insisted on calling a media center. Wanting to get a sense of what he learned about what

librarians do, I asked him what was the

librarian's job in the media center. Max

corrected me, "Mr. Smith was a "media

specialist" NOT a librarian. So, I asked, what

does the "media specialist" do? Max replied

that the "media specialist" "guards the books."

I was quite amused at what I thought was a medieval notion of the role of librarians, or media specialists. I'd like to propose that "guarding the books" is still at the heart of our

professional responsibility: guarding or preserving the books or information in all formats and media, even electronic, so that future generations may use that information and trust that it is authentic. Choosing what to guard and preserve is also at the heart of our

professional responsibility. Doing nothing is choosing not to preserve. Selecting to preserve, using our experience, discrimination and judgment, will give meaning to the past

for future generations who use our documents

collections. Someone in the future may even come looking for old copies of Infant Care.

1 . SOLINET, "Readings and Manuals on Book

Repair ." http://palimpsest.stanford.edu/solinet/ bkrprbib.htm

2. Library of Congress, "Deacidification Update"

http://lcweb.loc.gov/preserv/rt/ deacid.html

3. Conservation Online (CoOL) Web site, "Mass Deacidification," http://palimpsest.stanford.edu/bytopic/ massdeac/

4. RLG Preservation Microfilming Handbook,

Mountain View California: Research

Libraries Group, Inc., March 1992; RLG

Archives Microfilming Manual, Mountain View California: Research Libraries Group,

Inc., April 1994; and Preservation Microfilming, a Guide for Librarians and

Archivists, American Library Association, 1996.

5. Library of Congress, "Guidelines for Preservation Photocopying"

http://lcweb.loc.gov/preserv/care/photocpy. html

6. "Preservation Photocopying," by the Subcommittee on Preservation Photocopying Guidelines, Reproduction of

Library Materials Section Copying

Committee, Association for Library Collections & Technical Sen/ices, Library Resources and Technical services, vol. 38,

no. 3, pp. 289-290; "Archival Copies of Thermofax, Verifax, and Other Unstable

Copies," by Norvell M. M. Jones, Technical Information Paper No. 5. Washington, DC: National Archives &

Records Administration, 1990.

7. The American National Standard for Information and Image Management - Recommended Practice Inspection of Stored Silver-Gelatin Microforms for Evidence of Deterioration, ANSI/AIIM MS45-1990.

8. Northeast Document Conservation Center, "SURVEYS"

http://www.nedcc.org/tsurveys. htm#gensurv NEDCC's technical leaflet "What an

Institution Can Do to Survey Its Own

Collections."

175
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference Planning for Preservation of Digital Information:

an Archival Perspective

Kenneth Thibodeau

National Archives and Records Administration Washington, DC

Archival Preservation of Records Is Different than the Preservation of Publications, Because of Differences in the Basic Nature of Publications and Records

Publications are instruments intended to communicate information to an unspecified audience. That is, while there may be a target audience for a publication, it is not normally addressed to specific individuals. Records, on

the other hand, are instruments and by- products of intentional activities. Their primary purpose is not communication itself, but support of the activities in which the records are created, or other subsequent

activities connected to the ones in which the records originated. The target of a record is specific. Rather than author and readers, in the case of a record we have author and

addressee. Records are used to communicate within a group where a lot of information is common;

therefore, there are a lot of lacunas or ellipses

in records. Commonly shared information does not have to be repeated in each item. Thus, some information which is essential to understanding a record is likely not to be in the record itself. Records can only be

understood in the context of other records which precede and follow in the course of an

activity.

Therefore, archivists are not concerned with

the preservation of a record, but with the preservation of a collection of records. In records preservation, the archival bond is as important as the individual record. The

archival bond is the specific relationship, established by the records creator, between a

record and other records in a 'fonds,' which is the totality of records created by an identified records creator. If we break or obscure the

archival bond, then the meaning of the record

is altered. Subtract the archival bond and you

cannot preserve records, only documents.

Archival Preservation of Electronic Records Is Not Like the Preservation of Paper Records

For hard copy records, preservation equals

holding on to what you have. For example, we preserve paper records by deacidification

of paper, repair of tears, or replacement of

originals by copies that are "true to form."

For electronic records, holding on to what you

have will eventually mean loss of records, because all of the technology on which the records originally depend eventually will become obsolete, making the records

inaccessible. So, while a basic technique for preserving hard copy records is the use of permanent papers, for electronic records, a permanent medium is irrelevant.

All digital media will eventually become

obsolete. With new media formats being

introduced on a time scale of 18 months, that eventuality tends to be very soon in arriving. Even if we could preserve a digital medium for a long period of time, along with maintaining

the required hardware and software in operating condition, it would not be desirable

to do so. The ever increasing expense of maintaining obsolete technology would be compounded by the ever decreasing costs of

digital storage. Maintaining obsolete technology would also cut off opportunities to benefit from continuing improvements in 176
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

information technology. These improvements

reduce costs for both preservation and access and, typically, enable a greater volume of information to be delivered in a smaller

physical volume and more quickly. Planning to Preserve Electronic Records

In its forthcoming Guide for Managing

Electronic Records from an Archival

Perspective, the Committee On Electronic Records of the International Council on

Archives sets forth, as a principle in the framework for managing electronic records, "The archives must articulate preservation and

access requirements to ensure that archival electronic records remain available, accessible, and understandable."^

Implicit in this principle is the view that:

"Preservation and access to archival electronic records are interdependent;

"Available records are physically intact, identified, and readable;

"Accessible records can be selected within search strategies consonant with

the way the creator organized the records, and presented in an historically authentic form; and

"Understandable records are records which can be used as historical evidence.

This requires identification of the provenance of the records, maintenance

of the original order of the records, and

the availability of related records and

other contextual information."^ The purpose of preservation is access, but in the archival realm access means not access to information, but access to authentic records. This creates a basic tension in the preservation

of electronic records. Preserving authentic records ordinarily means preserving them in their original form, without alteration. But, as

stated, this is impossible for electronic records.

A digital preservation program must be

dynamic, both to counteract obsolescence and

to take advantage of improvements in information technology and decreasing costs of new technology. A dynamic preservation program is one that will select the best options

for preserving the records. But this selection

will be made from a set of possibilities that

itself will change. The key to making the right decisions is a sound migration strategy. As

stated in the 1996 publication. Preserving

Digital Information. Report of the Task Force on Archiving Digital Materials, a task force sponsored by the Commission on Preservation and Access and the RLG,

"Migration is a set of organized tasks designed to achieve the periodic transfer of digital materials from one

hardware/software configuration to another, or from one generation of computer technology to a subsequent

generation. The purpose of migration is to preserve the integrity of digital objects and

to retain the ability for clients to retrieve, display, and otherwise use them in the

face of constantly changing technology."^

Migrating electronic records across generations

of technology will inevitably involve transforming the records. The greatest challenge in archival presentation of electronic records derives from these inevitable transformations. The greatest challenge is not overcoming media fragility, or rapid obsolescence, or taking advantage of continuing improvements in technology. It is to distinguish the essential attributes of electronic records, which must be preserved, from other attributes, which are merely

artifacts of technology, and therefore can be

discarded without loss of authenticity or

alteration of meaning.'* There are a few, simple cases where these 'throw-away'

attributes are well known. They include the

physical media on which electronic records

are written and the specific way they are physically inscribed on those media. The

National Archives is at the fourth generation of

digital media used for preservation. It will change to a fifth medium within a few years.

177
Proceedings - 1 997 Federal Depository Conference

But beyond this simple level, there has not been much done In identifying the essential characteristics of electronic records. The ICA Guide, which I cited earlier, recognizes the problem: "Over time, it will be necessary to transform the records in order to migrate them from obsolete technology to current forms. Archival preservation requires that such transformations respect the

authenticity of4he records and that such changes enable the records to be retrieved and understood. Such transformation must be thoroughly documented."^ The problem is also recognized in a white paper which was issued on April 10 by the Consultative Committee for Space Data

Systems, Reference Model for an Open

Archival Information System.^ While this report is a product of the space science community, it does reflect archival principles and concerns. An archivist from the Center for Electronic Records, Dr. Bruce Ambacher, is a member of the panel of technical experts which produced the white paper. The white paper provides a generic framework for addressing the issue of preserving and

providing access to digital records. But the problem itself remains to be addressed. It is essential to do so in order to develop sound and viable plans for preserving electronic

records.

1. International Council on Archives. Committee on Electronic Records. Guide for Managing Electronic Records from an Archival

Perspective. 1997 (In press), p. 28.

2. Ibid.

3. The Commission on Preservation and

Access. Preserving Digital Information. Report of the Task Force on Archiving of

Digital Information. Commissioned by the Commission on Preservation and Access and

the Research Libraries Group, Inc. Washington, D.C. 1996. p. ii.

4. Kenneth Thibodeau. "Boundaries and

Transformations: an Object-Oriented Strategy

for Preservation of Electronic Records." Proceedings of the DLM Forum on Electronic Records, Cooperation Europe-Wide, Brussels, 18-20 December 1996. European Commission. Brussels. 1 997 (In press).

5. International Council on Archives. 1997. p. 29.

6. Consultative Committee for Space Data

Systems, Reference Model for an Open

Archival Information System. Report Concerning Space Data Systems Standards. (CCSDS 650.0W-1) Washington, D.C. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, CCSDS

Secretariat. 1997.

178
1 997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

Permanent Access Through Partnerships:

University of Illinois at Chicago, U.S.

Government Printing Office, U. S. Department

of State

Duncan Aldrich

U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, DC

During my one year as expert/consultant for the Govemment Printing Office (GPO), my

primary assignment has been to work on

projects that will provide for permanent public access to electronic Government information products remotely accessible through the Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP). In particular, I am charged with establishing partnerships between GPO and FDLP libraries which will provide for permanent access to collections of electronic Government

information products that partners maintain. My work on permanent access through

partnerships is a part of GPO's overall effort to implement the Strategic Plan contained in the Study to Identify Measures Necessary for a Successful Transition to a More Electronic FDLP. The Strategic Plan provides a very concise statement regarding partnering for permanent

access:GPO, as the administrator of the FDLP,

will coordinate a distributed system that provides continuous, permanent public

access, involving the publishing agencies,

the National Archives and Records

Administration, and regional and other depository libraries.^ My task has been to provide programmatic

detail on how this precise but not overly

prescriptive measure will be carried out.

Initial Efforts

In my initial attempts to write something down

regarding partnerships, one issue I thought

very important was that some sort of agreement or contract would be required to assure that access to products managed by FDLP partner libraries would indeed be permanent and public. With this in mind I began to draft a generic memorandum of understanding (MOU) to outline issues surrounding permanency and access.

I completed the generic MOU and distributed

it as a discussion draft on GOVDOC-L just before the fall Depository Library Council (DLC) meeting held in Salt Lake City. At the Council meeting I held a focus session to discuss the various obligations and

responsibilities itemized in the MOU which

provided some very good insight and

clarification. Additionally, Council recommended several revisions to strengthen

the draft MOU.

With a revised draft of the MOU done by

December, 1996, it was apparent that an initial partnership was needed as a test case. To make my job easier I turned to the existing partnership between University of Illinois- Chicago (UlC) and the Department of State (DOS) on the Department of State Foreign

Affairs Network (DOSFAN) Internet site. Aside from bypassing the work that would have been

involved in connecting an agency to a library, working with UlC and DOS simplified my

179
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

efforts because I have on several occasions worked closely with John Shuler, the government information specialist at UlC, so was working from an existing relationship on

that front as well. Memorandum of Understanding

Although all three partners agreed in principle

to the MOU early in the process, it took

several months to run through the process of

getting approval and signatures from all parties. This was a learning experience for me, and brought home a rule of thumb Jay Young

has often told me: the process is often as important as the final product. In GPO this was true, where the process led the MOU

through several offices for seemingly endless

consideration. But in fact the process made

the draft MOU stronger, particularly the refinements to the language in the MOU

suggested by the General Counsel's office. The MOU clearly identifies the information product that is covered by the stipulations of the MOU, which are products that DOS

migrates from their current DOSFAN Web site to the DOSFAN Electronic Research Collection which is maintained by UlC in partnership with the FDLP. Beyond identifying the DOSFAN Electronic Research Collection, the MOU outlines the requirements and

responsibilities among the partners to assure

that the partnership provides permanent public access to the DOSFAN collection. Overall, there are some 32 separate codicils in the MOU which can be collapsed under the following broader topics: Ownership

The MOU recognizes that the content of the information contained in the DOSFAN

Electronic Research Collection is in the public domain, and that a copy of software developed as an integral part of DOSFAN must accompany DOSFAN

content if the product is transferred from

UlC. It is recognized, however, that UlC

does own the intellectual property

associated with any value-added software

the university develops for DOSFAN,

other than specifically in its application to DOSFAN.

Security The MOU has many codicils addressing

security matters, which focus on such

standard issues as providing adequate

back-up procedures and fire walls.

Consultation The MOU provides for consultation among the partners on a number of issues pertaining to the DOSFAN product. Notable is the stipulation that UlC must

consult with GPO if UlC plans to

significantly alter the way in which DOSFAN is organized or accessed.

Consultation is also called for in the

identification of resources on DOSFAN

which are appropriate for FDLP access. Access The MOU requires provision for at least

five simultaneous users, and requires that the product be available for Internet access ninety-five percent of the time.

Notification of Partnership To promote the partnership and to provide

appropriate notification that DOS and GPO recognize the UlC site as the official location for the DOSFAN Research

Collection, adequate notice of the partnership will be posted to Internet sites operated by each partner.

Locators and Bibliographic Control Through its Locator Services and GPO

Access Monthly Catalog, GPO will provide pointers and bibliographic access

to products on both DOSFAN and the DOSFAN Research Collection.

180
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

Fail Safe Mechanism

Probably the most important stipulation, the MOD requires UlC to surrender a copy of the DOSFAN Research Collection and any UlC developed software necessary to access the collection in the event UlC can no longer support permanent access. The stipulation recognizes that no institution can

realistically agree that they will maintain a product like DOSFAN forever, though the partnership suggests that effort will be made.

Future Partnering Efforts As I look to the future of partnerships I see the GPO's role as that of broker between

prospective FDLP library partners and Federal agencies that view FDLP libraries as a means

for providing permanent public access to remotely accessed electronic agency

information products. My efforts this year to date have focused on examining the role of FDLP libraries as FDLP partners, and to identify libraries and library consortia

interested in participating. Toward this end I have held two focus groups, one each at the

fall and spring Depository Library Council

meetings, and have identified about ten

libraries or library systems and consortia that are interested in signing on as partners. My problem now is the other side of the brokerage. Initial efforts to identify agencies

interested in signing on to partnerships have

not been effective. In fact, the overall initial efforts to communicate to agencies GPO's

interest in providing permanent access have

not had much success. Which means my final two months at GPO will be busy trying to pick up the agency side of this. It is obvious that new tactics must be explored to interest agencies in using the FDLP to provide

permanent public access to their information

products. My first step in designing new

strategies will be to consult with Council members employed by Federal agencies,

including Eliot Christian, Phyllis Christenson, and Dan Clemmer. On a final note, when John Shuler and I spoke

last week we realized that now that the MOU

was signed we actually have work we need to do to implement the UlC/DOS/GPO

partnership. Though I will still be involved, Lee Morey of GPO's Electronic Transition Staff will be working directly with John and with Colleen Hope of the Department of State to fill in the detail to make this first FDLP partnership

a success.

1 . Study to Identify Measures Necessary for a Successful Transition to a More Electronic Federal Depository Library Program

(Washington, DC: Government Printing

Office, 1996). p. E-7. http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/dpos/

studyhtm.html

181
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

182
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

Contributors

Duncan M. Aldrich Head, Business & Government Information Center

University Libraries University of Nevada, Reno

Reno, NV 89557-0044

(702) 784-6500

(702) 784-4398 (Fax) duncan@unr.edu

Julie Arnott Manager, Preservation Services Southeastern Library Network, Inc. 1438 West Peachtree Street, NW, Suite 200

Atlanta, GA 30309-2955

(800) 999-8558

jarnott@mail.solinet.net

Stuart M. Basefsky

Information Specialist Cornell University School of industrial and Labor Relations 232 Ives Hall

Ithaca, NY 14853-3901

(607) 255-2184

smb6@cornell.edu

Carol Bednar Government Documents Coordinator

California State University, Fullerton University Library 800 North State College Boulevard

Fullerton, CA 92634-4150

(714) 278-7035

cbednar@fullerton.edu Anne H. Bolin

Librarian National Criminal Justice Reference Service

Library 1600 Research Boulevard

Rockville, MD 20850

(301) 251-5101

abolin@ncjrs.org

Thomas F. Clareson AMIGOS Preservation Service Manager

AMIGOS Bibliographic Council, Inc. 12200 Park Central Drive, Suite 500

Dallas, TX 75251-2104

(800) 843-8482

clareson@amigos.org David A. Cobb

Head, Harvard Map Collection Han/ard University Pusey Library Cambridge, MA 02138

(617) 495-2417

cobb@fas.harvard.edu

Wilfred D. Danielson

Cataloger

U.S. Government Printing Office

Library Programs Service (SLLC) 732 North Capitol Street, NW

Washington, DC 20401

(202) 512-1134 wdanielson@gpo.gov

Thomas A. Downing

Chief, Cataloging Branch

U.S. Government Printing Office

Library Programs Service (SLLC) 732 North Capitol Street, NW

Washington, DC 20401

(202) 512-1 121 tdowning@gpo.gov

Evelyn Frangakis NAL Presenilation Officer National Agricultural Library 10301 Baltimore Boulevard, Room 300

Beltsville, MD 20705

(301) 504-6503

efrangak@nal.usda.gov

183
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

John A. Hearty

Director, Reference Services Business Development

OCLC Online Computer Library Center, Inc. 6565 Frantz Road

Dublin, OH 43017-3395

(800) 848-5878

john_hearty@oclc.org

Tom Hester Technical Editor Bureau of Justice Statistics 633 Indiana Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20531

(202) 633-3021 tom@ojp.usdoj.gov .

. -

Robert A. Hinton Reference/Documents Librarian Indiana University-Purdue University- Indianapolis

University Library 755 West Michigan Street .- : . Indianapolis, IN 46202-5195

(317) 278-2317

rhinton@library.iupui.edu

Jean L. Hirons

Acting CONSER Coordinator

Library of Congress

Serial Records Division 101 Independence Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20540-4160

(202) 707-5947

jhir@loc.gov John C. Kavaliunas

Assistant Chief, Marketing Services Office Bureau of the Census

U.S. Department of Commerce

Building 3, Room 3021

Washington, DC 20233

(301)457-4090

john.c.kavaliunas@ccmail.census.gov

Mary L. Larsgaard

Assistant Head, Map and Imagery Laboratory

University of California, Santa Barbara Davidson Library Santa Barbara, CA 93106-9010

(805) 893-4049

mary@sdc.ucsb.edu

Roger D. Launius

Chief Historian National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASA History Office, Code ZH

300 E Street, SW

Washington, DC 20546

(202) 358-0383

roger.launius@hq.nasa.gov

Gregory W. Lawrence Government Information Librarian Cornell University Albert R. Mann Library Tower Road

Ithaca, NY 14853-4301

(607) 255-3242

gwll@cornell.edu

Barbara Levergood

Electronic Documents Librarian University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill Davis Library, CB 3912

Chapel Hill, NC 27514-8890

(919) 962-1151

leverg.davis@mhs.unc.edu

Elizabeth U. Mangan

Head, Technical Services Section

Library of Congress Geography and Map Division 101 Independence Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20540

(202) 707-8520

mangan@mail.loc.gov

Jennifer E. McMullen

Government Publications Associate College of Wooster Andrews Library Wooster, OH 44691-2364

(330) 263-2119

jmcmullen@acs.wooster.edu

184
1997 Federal Depository Conference - Proceedings

David L. Morrison

Fellowship Librarian U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent & Trademark Depository Library Program

Crystal Park #3, Suite 461 Washington, DC 20231

(703) 308-5558

morrison@uspto.gov Nan L. Myers Government Documents Librarian Wichita State University Ablah Library 1845 Fairmont

Wichita, KS 67260-0068

(316) 978-5138

myers@twsuvm.uc.twsu.edu

Keith W. Russell Deputy Library Director National Agricultural Library 10301 Baltimore Boulevard

Beltsville, MD 20705-2351

(301) 504-6780

krussell@nal.usda.gov

Irene Schubert

Acting Chief, Preservation Reformatting

Division

Library of Congress

Mail Stop 4550, Room C-05

101 Independence Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20540-4550

(202) 707-5918

isch@loc.gov

Barbara M. Selby Government Documents Librarian University of Virginia Alderman Library University Avenue and McCormick Road

Charlottesville, VA 22903-2498

(804) 924-6259

bms8z@virginia.edu

Eileen D. Seremeth

Cataloger

U.S. Government Printing Office

Library Programs Service (SLLC) 732 North Capitol Street, NW

Washington, DC 20401

(202) 512-0871 (TTY) eseremeth@gpo.gov

Richard L. Sillcox Oceanographer

National Ocean Service National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration 1305 East-West Highway, SSMC-3, Room 6612

Silver Spring, MD 20910

(301) 713-2813, ext. 179

rich@ceob.nos.noaa.gov Warren Snaider

Contracting Officer's Technical Representative General Services Administration

Federal Information Center (TNEI)

1 8th and F Street, NW

Washington, DC 20405

(202) 501-1939

warren .snaider@gsa.gov Martha C. Sneed

Manager, Patent & Trademark Depository

Library Program

U.S. Patent & Trademark Office

Crystal Park #3, Suite 481

Washington, DC 20231

(703) 308-5558 msneed@uspto.gov Anna A. Sylvan GIS/Government Documents Librarian

St. Charles City-County Library District Middendorf-Kredell Branch 2750 Highway K

O'Fallon, MO 63366-7859

(314) 978-7997

asylvan@mail.win.org

185
Proceedings - 1997 Federal Depository Conference

Rosalind Tedford Government Documents Assistant Wake Forest University

Z. Smith Reynolds Library Wake Forest Road

Winston-Salem, NC 27109-7777

(910) 759-5538

tedford@lib.wfu.edu Kenneth Thibodeau

Director, Center for Electronic Records

National Archives and Records Administration 8601 Adelphi Road, Room 5320

College Park, MD 20740-6001

(301) 713-6630

ken.thibodea@arch2.nara.gov

Thomas G. Tyler Associate Director for Budget

University of Denver

Penrose Library 21 50 East Evans Avenue

Denver, CO 80208

(303)871-3334

ttyler@du.edu

Paul F. Uhlir Associate Director, Special Projects National Research Council Commission on Physical Sciences, Mathematics & Applications 2101 Constitution Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20418

(202) 334-3061

puhlir@nas.edu

Steven R. Uthoff

Administrative Librarian U.S. Government Printing Office

Library Programs Sen/ice (SLLC) 732 North Capitol Street, NW

Washington , DC 20401

(202) 512-1106

suthoff@gpo.gov

John Ward

Writer/Editor Small Business Administration

Office of Advocacy 409 3rd Street, SW

Washington, DC 20416

(202) 205-6958

john.ward@sba.gov

Diann Weatherly Documents Reference Librarian University of Alabama at Birmingham

Men/yn H. Sterne Library 917 South 13th Street Birmingham, AL 35294

(205) 934-6364

dweatherly@beowulf.mhsl.uab.edu

Arlene Weible

Periodicals and Government Documents

Librarian Willamette University Mark O. Hatfield Library 900 State Street Salem, OR 97303

(503) 375-5343

aweible@willamette.edu Saundra Williams Head, Government Publications

University of Memphis

University Libraries Memphis, TN 38152-1000

(901) 678-2206

swilliam@cc.memphis.edu

Cynthia Wolff

Acting Head, Government Publications and Maps

Northwestern University Library 1935 Sheridan Road

Evanston, IL 60208-2352

(847) 491-3130

c-wolff@nwu.edu

186 *"-S. GOVERSMENT PRINTING OFFICE:! 997-4 1 7-96 1 /85727