Marianne Burke, Bob Buckwalter, John Collins, Michael Fitzgerald, Dale Flecker, Rodney Goins, Kathy Klemperer, Ted Pappadopoulos, Jon Rothman, Lynne Schmelz (chair), Dorothy Solbrig, Mark Van Baalen, Judy Warnement, Robin Wendler (recording), Charles Willard
Absent: Marianne Burke, Carrie Kent
Guests: Ellen Isenstein, MacKenzie Smith
June 15, 1994 -- 10-12 a.m. Countway Library
Michael Fitzgerald presented the report "Future of the Bridge", produced by the Bridge Working Group. There are five basic recommendations (adapted from the report):
HAAC discussed whether a separate Bridge subcommittee was necessary or whether the work could be assigned to one or more existing committees, such as SSHUSH, CILU, and the Committe on Electronic Reference Services. After discussion, the group agreed that the volume or work required during the first year would overburden any existing committee, and that a separate group should be established. It was clear that broad representation (both of different faculties and different groups such as those mentioned above, OIS, OIT, and collection development) is a serious concern. The necessary breadth of representation cannot be addressed entirely within the membership of the subcommittee, so one of the subcommittee's first challenges will be to establish a plan for soliciting input from and reporting decisions to a wide variety of groups and individuals. Lynne would like the group to report back to HAAC the plan it makes to address this concern. Michael Fitzgerald and Kathy Klemperer will solicit the chairs of relevant committees for possible committee members, and choose a small, representative group for HAAC's approval.
Ted Pappadopoulos noted that the report refers to the Bridge both as a pointer to resources at other sites and as a server for some resources which will live directly on the Bridge. Mark Van Baalen argued that this distinction has implications for the level of support to be provided, and therefore it must be made clear to users where resources are and what level of support to expect for each. Charles Willard disagreed, saying that users won't make distinctions based on whose resource is broken. They have learned to expect interruptions in the availability of any network resource. Jon Rothman explained that the choice to place some resources on the Bridge itself arose from the placement of some library-generated documents on the VINE. It was felt it would be more helpful to users if all library resources could be found via established library servers, either those specific to an individual library or HUL's site, the Bridge.
John Collins suggested that decisions about resources to be mounted on the Bridge itself (rather than just pointers) should be passed by HAAC, particularly since OIS resources will be required. Judy Warnement added that many libraries manage their own servers, and that OIS could establish a new service (and charge for it ), mounting data on the Bridge for those libraries do not have their own servers.
Judy Warnement noted that most use of the Bridge in the long run will not take place in libraries. We need to consider publicity, documentation, and training needs for remote users, such as the undergraduate houses.
The report was unanimously approved, with the provision that HAAC revisit the question in a year to determine whether a separate subcommittee is still necessary.
Amy Lozano, manager of the VINE, has resigned. OIS is seeking applicants for the position.
The Bridge pamphlet is almost ready for distribution. A relatively small number of the pamphlets will be distributed. Since the Bridge is expected to change so rapidly, it's better to produce small runs of regularly updated information.
Martha Creedon has been hired as Reporting Specialist in OIS. She will perform reporting using existing tools as well as participate in the end-user reporting project.
Dale reported that the informal group of systems librarians for large research libraries is planning a visit to Ottawa in the summer to see the National Library of Canada's newly developed system. The system development is reported to be several months behind at this point. The group has also been discussing a current hot topic: in the world of client-server architecture, who's going to be supplying the clients? Will everyone make their own, will there be library-specific ones or will they be more generic? The group plans to meet at ALA with client-development vendors, including OCLC.