Minutes of January 2, 2003 Meeting

G. Agnew; R. Bogan; J. Boyle; R. Jantz; A. Ka-Neng; R. Marker; M. Page; G. Smulewitz (recorder) M. Weber; M. Lo, guest.

G. Agnew report:

New Jersey Digital initiative-

Metadata will play a critical role in the New Jersey Digital initiative. Core metadata is essential and must be established. Will plan to migrate RU Core to NJ Core. RUL applying for an IMLS (Institute for Museum and Library Studies) grant in collaboration with the state library to build components of the "Digital New Jersey" infrastructure.

Many committees will be formed to work on NJ Digital initiative. To date there is no committee looking at copyright issues. It was suggested that J. Boyle play a role in these developments. J. Boyle is working on rights and access with NJEDge and there may be some overlap.

The P.I. on the grant will be Ron Jantz. The goal is to establish:

  1. standards based initiative
  2. regional digitalization center
  3. solid highly functional supportive storage center
  4. transparent to user
  5. images not video

Existing Digital NJ Committees and RUL Membership:

Metadata Committee - G. Agnew (chair), Tom Frusciano, Ruth Bogan.

Content committee: RU has no representatives

Digital standards committee- Ann Montanaro and Linda Langschied.

Grant writing committee - Grace Agnew, T.Frusciano, R. Jantz

Education and Outreach - Rhonda Marker

Portal Design - Linda Langschied

Report on Pilot Project re: Wireless technology for Libraries: Mei Ling Lo


A analysis of the RUCS wireless program was conducted by Mei Ling Lo, in order to determine the feasibility of a wireless at the Math Library. The test revealed many issues that need evaluation to offer wireless technology at the libraries.

The shared bandwidth for wireless technology is different than that of RUNet 2000. Wireless technology is now in use at student centers and elsewhere. A special RU wireless logo is being used to indicate that an area is available for wireless use. There are many issues that need to be communicated to the university community regarding wireless. It would be helpful for RUCS to establish a university-wide task force to collaborate in the development of the appropriate communications and materials needed to educate the community and also to handle FAQ's and any misunderstandings. One example is that people do not have to download software to use wireless when using Windows 2000, they will just logon. If an individual has an earlier version of Windows they must go to the website for a password.

RUCS will be a key component in wireless support. The Helpdesk at RUCS will give support for wireless technology. The Helpdesk will physically help to install the card needed for wireless adaptation as well as answer any questions.

The pilot project must be evaluated to determine where improvement is necessary.

Some issues:

RUCS will use Blue Socket software to authenticate users and as an added benefit the software will provide statistics on bandwidth usage to determine the amount of usage. They are installing as local area wireless networks (LAWN or WLAN).

It will be necessary to determine how users are using wireless technologies in order to strategically locate wireless service to meet user needs.. Is the greatest usage for email, research or what? Some of the FAQ's coming from wireless usage may wind up as FAQ's for "Ask a librarian"

Mei Ling indicated that the biggest issue is cost. The cost is determined by the hub and the server to establish access and is partially determined by how many access points are needed in a location. The access points need to be close to the ceiling and only so many users can be in an area of access. At present there can be 10 to 20 users per access point depending on the speed. RUCS wants to reduce the number of access points to release wireless channel space. This will help to make wireless access more efficient.

The cost for labor and maintenance for wireless installation and follow up is $1,500 for first year and $750/yr for Helpdesk, labor maintenance and software maintenance after that.

Questions that need to be considered:

Is the maintenance fee a model that we want to follow? The changes in the University will effect the cost issue.

There are security issues with wireless access. How does the library want to handle guest users? Access for guest users must be requested. Guest users will not need special software other than a secure web browser and all platforms will be supported. How should casual walk-ins be handled and where should they be directed? Conference accounts will be useful.

RUCS is aware of these issues but not clear on the policies yet. They need to be more specific.

Connectivity to other devices like network printers is not easy to configure to wireless users. It may be possible for the user to FTP or email material to him/herself and use stationary units to print.

Walk-up ports- the cost estimate does not include open Ethernet ports. At Math Library there is limited space for walk-up port installation. The Math Library may have limited power for installation. May not be issue for larger sites.

Other issues like pop-up jacks, additional outlets were also discussed as well as posting health warnings for the devices. There may not be room at the Math Library for additional outlet installations. The outlet issue at the Math Library should have been looked at as part of assessment. The library doesn't have enough outlets to support number of users for access points. Outlets are a critical issue since most laptop users want to plug their laptop into ports rather than run down their batteries. Students prefer to reserve battery use for critical times when an outlet is not available, such as classroom note taking.

There is an IT Coordinating Council and Computer Science is well represented on this council and they are very well aware of the different issues regarding wireless installations and maintenance.

Wireless at Dana.- officially only on 2nd floor. Dana is using same program. There are questions about loading cards. The Business School students like it. There isn't heavy usage at Dana. Usage is diverse for - email, surfing, individual and groups. It was installed in October.

Camden has discussed wireless but has not installed it.

G. Agnew mentioned that at Georgia Tech- students were able to check out wireless cards. For the first couple of weeks there were problems and then the program was pretty problem free.

The PC Working Group is concerned about standards re: wireless given that newer wireless standards are emerging. The standards issue needs further evaluation.

There are other uses for wireless at RUL that are under consideration. - stacks usage for inventory. Pocket PCs need wireless access for stack maintenance and browsing use. One question, however, is whether stacks provide too much interference, particularly since book pages are made of cellulose. Water interferes with wireless broadcasts. Trees are a major hindrance for wireless transmission because the cellulose of living trees are full of water. Tests would need to be conducted with loaner equipment.

Extrapolating from the Math calculations - a casual estimated cost of $10,900 was projected for wireless to be installed at LSM. This does not include any additional electrical outlets and wiring, however.

Questions arose about the possibility of inappropriate use of laptops in the stack area. Policies for harassment were questioned and discussed. Building designs regarding dark spaces and dead end spaces were questioned if wireless was available in stack area.

G. Agnew is in favor of paying RUCS a maintenance fee in order to develop a clear service provide/customer relationship and to insure that RUCS devotes adequate staff to the project. Potential usage is unclear at this point. She recommended that a steering committee or council be established to continuously evaluate usage etc. It was recommended that a formal organization be established for emerging technologies and strategic planning and goals be established for funding and implementation. A ballpark figure should be determined for our areas. A joint TSC and PSC working group be established which should come up with a priority list. Volunteers for a joint committee are: M. Lo, M. Page, G. Smulewitz, K. Au.

Reconciliation with OCLC -G. Agnew

The initial price for reconciliation was rather hefty $67,000. They have reduced the price by $22,000 and are allowing us to pay over 3 yrs. We would like our data to be loaded on a monthly basis as an alternative to a massive load. This plan accommodates withdrawals. R. Warwick is managing the project. R. Bogan and R. Warwick will develop a strategy for retrospective conversion so that this work can continue and we do not pay twice for loading recon holdings.

The plan with Camden for shelf-ready material will be postponed to 6 months after the OCLC reconciliation starts.

DAWG-I (Data Architecture and Infrastructure Working Group) report - R. Jantz

This working group is very important to the sustainability of content and the sustainability of architecture for the digital library initiative.

R. Jantz is chair of this committee for the first year and then A. Montanaro for 2nd yr.

There is a need to educate ourselves to the technologies of:

Shibboleth, OpenURL and Web-content management systems are to be added to interoperability protocols.

Shibboleth was not mentioned in NSF grant but now will also be tested as part of that grant. It may be done in part as a pro bono effort by Internet2

DAWG-A is the architecture team. DAWG-A the architecture team is in the process of evaluating two repository systems.

DSpace the project jointly developed by a MIT and Hewlitt Packard partnership It is installed to test. There are metadata issues. There is no apparent way that DSpace handles the structures. There is also no apparent workflow support for ejournals.

FEDORA- (Flexible Extensible Digital Object and Repository Architecture) is a collaborative development between University of Virginia and Cornell University. Structures are handled well by FEDORA.

The group expects to select a system by June 2003 and prototype a sample content. By Sept. 2003 they anticipate prototyping multiple sample nodes.

DAWG - Architectural philosophy-Principles of evaluation: Interoperability, sustainability and extensibility. Should be able to hold anything/ flexibility. Policies need to be established for guidelines on how we want a repository system to be able to support RUCore. OAIS is the functional model for the system. RULDLN (Rutgers University Library Digital Library Network?)- is working vocabulary for the team. The concept is to be able to perform searching and browsing across multiple repositories.

CAMDEN-BASE is ready to be transferred to Systems. This transfer is important for the following reasons:

  1. in order for CAMDEN-BASE to be on a common platform.
  2. for all library databases to be under the care of Systems.
  3. sustainability- people who develop projects are not asked to maintain systems
  4. webbased ability for Camden to add records rather then sending a database to be added by SCC or systems.

Discussion on Public Service Aspect of DLN -Digital Library Network.

Cross repository searching needs considerable amount of thought and evaluation to modify user interface. May need more Public Service Council representation on DAWG.

G. Agnew recommended that a conference be held where we share hosting. The focus would be on what it means to be a repository. Planning Committee might want to spearhead.

It was recommended to look at Colorado Virtual Library - they are searching 120 repositories. Can have screen with 120 checkpoints but need complex user interface. The state of New Jersey has grey literature for repository. We need to look at NJCore for this purpose.

Portals for this need to be lightweight and fairly virtual. Three types of customized portals can be built - 1. community e.g. Physics dept. 2. content. 3. format. as major functional requirements.

Discussion continued on the technical needs of repository development. G. Agnew stressed the need to educate our community and raise the level of awareness through a series of workshops before presenting to the community at large.

Next Technical Services Council meeting scheduled for 2/ 6/03 at TSB at 9:30.

URL: http://www.libraries.rutgers.edu/rul/staff/groups/tsc/minutes/tsc_03_01_02.shtml
Website Feedback  |  Privacy Policy
© Copyright 1997-, Rutgers University Libraries