The Technical Team has a plan for management of and access to commercial media acquired for streaming, although it has been delayed due to repository issues (which delayed the RFP process as well). The WWZA Media server works on all platforms and supports all formats and will provide redundancy. It will be purchased by the end of the academic year and in place by September. All streaming servers except NJVid will redirect to it. We will retain current software, integrating a "WMS lite" and a version of the repository to minimize the learning curve. We would isolate commercial offerings, but expedite implementation by integrating existing tools. Discussion ensued about the system's relationship to the ERMS. We will test by putting licenses in WMS lite and tie it into the ERMS.
We have signed on to NJVid for another year; duration of the partnership is unclear. There is still some concern about sustainability but the price has been halved. Communication and NJEdge ingest may continue to be concerns. J. Sloan will forward NJEdge's email outlining the new service and pricing model. The Ordering Subteam will need to monitor developments.
G. Agnew's May 3 email to J. Sloan, M. Gaunt, M.B. Weber, J. Otto, T. Purger, et al. said she would meet with "Tibor and Jane about the streaming platform to see where we stand and to assist in any way I can since this is a top priority for the streaming media team this summer." J. Otto will follow up on Grace's email.
J. Sloan reviewed a list of recent NJVid purchases and noted that NJVid ordering is handled very differently from other VALE purchases. We will not enter these titles on the project management spreadsheets until there is a purchase order. M.B. Weber will review the workflow with J. Otto to make sure there is a trigger for entering titles into the stream.
These titles are acquired through the vendors, and there are two availability dates to keep in mind: 1) when the vendor makes it available to us and 2) when the video is ingested into RUcore. G. Smulewitz suggested putting a control in the SIRSI order record, which would function like a serial claim, prompting the vendor, prompting Sujay for ingest, and encumbering the funds. The claim process runs reports and sends email alerts. J. Otto will add this to the next Ordering Subteam agenda.
The Ordering Subteam is moving ahead with its plans to coordinate media order requests via a group email account. J. Otto will draft a charge based on the RUL E-Books Team document (which is based on the Serials Team model). M.B. Weber will send J. Otto an electronic version. J. Otto will add as an agenda item to the next Subteam meeting next steps for announcing the charge, group account, etc. following the E-Books team model.
The Subteam is also moving forward on its plan to perform a business analysis documenting mental processes, workflows, and groups involved in the acquisitions process. Jamie Maguire (DTS) will be the recorder. J. Otto will set up a meeting time for this once the business analyst is appointed. [T. Purger appointed Kalaivani as business analyst, May 9, 2011.]
G. Smulewitz and J. Sloan reported on their meeting to share information about two systems holding information on rights restrictions: the ERMS at DTS and the Procite database at the Media Center. A. Butman will load the ProCite database onto G. Smulewitz's computer at Alex. Both the public and ILL staff need to know the restrictions. It will be necessary to decide what elements are essential to record and how they can be accessed outside the bib record. (Within the MARC bib record, restrictions are recorded in the 856 "Electronic Location and Access" field.) Restrictions for indexes, databases, and journals are recorded in the A-Z list. J. Otto will add this to the next Ordering Subteam agenda. G. Smulewitz pointed out that 856 is a holdings field and should display in that part of the record rather than in the bib record; see the NCSU Libraries catalog for an example of this approach. One advantage of this is that holdings are configurable by format. This issue is broader than media materials but we might want to use media as a test case. It would need to be set up first in the test system. J. Otto will add this to the next Ordering Subteam agenda.
To move the faculty conference toolkit project forward, J. Otto will compile the information faculty users will need to know, determine workflow to be followed, data fields needed, etc., for initial review by T. Purger.
Making resources accessible by adding captioning, etc. will impact costs, but the cost will be incurred after the order, as we would want to apply it on demand. It was suggested that the Office of Disability Services for Students may provide financial support for these services. V. Cvetkovic confirmed that this Office helps when visually impaired students need books. E. Stec will check with Gregory Moorehead (Director of the Office of Disability Services for Students), investigate funding through that Office, and try to identify standard practices.
RUL holds six years of Mason Gross student music performances which belong in RUcore, rather than the Libraries catalog. (Videos, including Dance Department student performance videos, could be added in the future.) Most are degree recitals, although some record Rutgers ensembles. M. Oswell would like to create and ingest the metadata. The Music Department wishes to restrict access to Rutgers users, in large part because of inferior recording quality. Both metadata-only ingest and restricted access would be precedents for RUcore. Embargo is not a viable option for limiting access. Technically it should be possible to restrict access, but there is a policy issue. Within the Media Team there was some support for restricting access in RUcore in order to make available materials that would otherwise be completely inaccessible. M. Oswell will revisit the restricted access issue with the Department, once the new chair is in place.
Last year Isaiah received a set of commercial DVDs ("Music Masterclass") for transcoding from M. Oswell. These DVDs were purchased with streaming rights and the DVDs themselves had already been cataloged in IRIS. Given IRIS search and retrieval, the name of the series is insufficient to positively identify each individual title to which we own streaming rights. M. Oswell will send J. Otto a title list so the streaming versions can be cataloged.
As a general FYI, J. Otto announced that she and J. Sloan have begun work organizing a forum to discuss video use in the curriculum. This would consist of several brief presentations and discussion over lunch, sometime in late October or early November. The plan is to invite three or so faculty speakers with diverse perspectives (e.g., cinema studies, a language program, and social science, history, or communications) to speak about their use of video in the curriculum, with discussion about ways to expand use and improve access through the Libraries catalog and possibly RUcore.
J. Otto was part of an email exchange with M. Gaunt, J. Sloan, M.B. Weber, and G. Agnew about IRIS access issues for media and other materials. She suggested some possibilities for change and is awaiting a reply. Because the central issue is SIRSI, the discussion should begin in the LIS Committee, which reports to G. Agnew. Several members of the Media Team serve on the LIS Committee, and S. Bartz represents IPAC there. Discussion of such a broad range of issues requires wide representation, similar to that on the Item Type Task Force. The 856 holdings issue could be subsumed under this discussion as well. It was recommended that J. Otto initiate a discussion with LIS to set up a process; sooner rather than later, and beginning with LIS chair Chris Sterback. J. Otto will contact Chris Sterback about IRIS access issues.