Ann began the meeting by asking each member to introduce themselves.
The task force reviewed the charge and made some observations.
Ann stated that she did not believe everyone needed to have a thorough understanding of all of the technical standards but that the members should know what the standards are and which vendors support them.
Ann identified Leslie Brown as our contact in Purchasing and that she was very helpful and effective in the RFP process for the mass storage system. Ann added that she asked Leslie whether we could beta-test SIRSI's emerging ERM product without affecting the objective nature of the RFP. Leslie replied that this would not endanger our RFP process.
Ann then stated that we should start this process first by clearly identifying the problem we are trying to solve and who we are solving the problem for. She then recommended that we use the answers to these questions to begin identifying the requirements for the individual components of an ERM.
Some task force members believe that we should purchase all three products from one vendor, with the idea that this will provide a more integrated solution, while others were not sold on this fact. Based on this, the task force will begin by developing requirements, features, and benefits for each component of the ERM, then at a later date review the intersection of these requirements as we see product demonstrations.
Some committee members have read reviews and articles stating that metasearching products have a high cost and a perceived low benefit while ERMs have a variable cost, from low to high, but a perceived high benefit.
It is a record of the journal holdings we have access to with coverage information, and can also include such elements as linking rules, proxy redirects, and passwords. Cathy stated that it is important for the knowledge base provider to demonstrate an active role in maintaining coverage updates for all titles and packages both large and small. This is not what we have now and Cathy spends a lot of time entering updates manually.
The committee created three categories, one for each component of the integrated system, then brainstormed the requirements for each. The categories and possible requirements are:
ERM - electronic resources management
Metasearch (federated searching)
The meeting adjourned with reading, communication, and information sharing assignments.
a. Ann will create an Electronic Resources mailing list and subscribe all committee members. This list should be used for all ERATF communications. [Subsequent to this meeting, Ann created the mailing list. It is called ELECTRONIC///RESOURCE_COM@///EMAIL.RUTGERS.EDU].(Remove slashes..added to foil web bots)
b. Cathy Pecoraro attended a presentation, hosted by NYTSL, on managing electronic resources. The presenter was the the Digital Resources Coordinator at Princeton. Cathy stated that this was a very good presentation and that we might want to make a site visit.
c. NASIG has an ERM presentation online. Gracemary will send the link to the ERATF.
d. Marty will research articles comparing meta-searching products and distribute them to the group.
e. Other online resources include 1)ALCTS presentation attended by Cathy, Gracemary, and Chris this past summer at ALA, 2)DLF/ERMI website, 3)archive of the national e-resource listserv, 4)ALA ERM, openurl, and metasearching documents, 5) Sep 2005 NISO workshop on OpenURL & Metasearch attended by Ann. Committee members will share the links with their colleagues.
The next ERATF meeting has been scheduled for Wednesday, December 14 at 9:30 a.m. in the TSB conference room.