Goals for this meeting/agenda:
-members will discuss sessions attended at ALA Midwinter(San Antonio)
-dates will be set for product demonstrations
Opening discussion: Reminder that and ERM carries a maintenance cost as well as an initial one- time cost. Knowledgebase is very important-EBSCO A to Z is our knowledgebase for now-if we change to new knowledgebase, we will incur more costs. Discussion about current issues with "A to Z." Any product we buy in the near future would have to be compatible with A to Z. Things are changing quickly at RUL in many areas. It may be helpful to talk with Princeton.
Brief discussion(all) about federated search products specifically:
So much is happening with federated search products currently. KD attended WebFeat's ALA session and noted that some were very impressed with what was presented. What are our expectations? What about the native databases? MK feels a product that would get you to a list of relevant databases would be ideal. How important is subject vocabulary/thesauri? MK-In the age of Google Scholar, you lose a lot of richness with federated search. This area is a quick moving target at the moment. Many attended the ACRL-STS discussion about "Federated Search in the age of Google Scholar." The session focused on MetaLib. Reference librarians did not feel comfortable with the product-it sends mixed messages. Patrons may be short-changed by not using full range of resources offered. LBM questions whether a federated search product(as they are currently available) can really be the fix for the complicated scenario that respondents to LibQual complained about.. Is that product out there that will overlay our website and make it more of a "Google Box" experience? MK questions whether Google Scholar would be "good enough" for many of our patrons. . Google Scholar is being used by some as a metasearch product. This is only felt to be worthwhile if the subscribed-to content is there to connect to. Reminder from our first meeting that we can evaluate a federated search product as a separate purchase from the ERM, etc.
GS raises discussion of the building and customization of the product. Which groups at RUL would be involved? We would develop it after the fact. Do we have to fill out forms to put information into it? No matter what the product, we have to determine how we want to implement and customize it. Example made of VTLS -developers have a more sophisticated/intellectual approach. They know what we need but sales have been a problem. Brief discussion about SIRSI and our relationship with them, and their use of third-party vendors. AM feels that the market will shrink-4 or 5 companies now do the same thing slightly differently-the differences are really very subtle. It doesn't really matter if we stick with one product as nothing really revolutionary is out there-this may change.
Brief discussion of website issues-situation is very complicated for the patron at present.
2. Demos. Scheduled:
Serials Solutions suite of products: Feb.17th 10:00 TSB
WebFeat : Shown at our regularly scheduled meeting on March 8, 9:30 TSB
Adjournment at 11 a.m.
Respectfully submitted by Laura Bowering Mullen