Standing Committee on Automation

Notes of SCA Meeting at ALA Annual

New Orleans, LA. June 27, 1999
4:30-6:30 p.m., OCLC Suite

Present: Jeanne Baker, Matthew Beacom, Ruth Bogan, Karen Calhoun, Eric Celeste, Ed Glazier, Louise Ratliff, Gary Strawn, David Whitehair, David Williamson

Karen welcomed new member Jeanne Baker of the University of Maryland and thanked Eric Celeste for his service to the SCA during his term (Eric cycles off at the end of September). The group discussed the following agenda topics:

• Cataloging tools survey
• CORC and PCC
• Automated assistance with classification
• Real time upload of authorities (RLG)
• Task Group on Journals in Aggregator Databases

Cataloging Tools Survey (Ruth Bogan and Louise Ratliff)
At the SCA's Midwinter meeting, we decided to look into current awareness and use of the cataloging tools that the PCC had advocated. Ruth provided the group with a summary of the results of a survey that she and Louise had prepared. They asked if catalogers were aware of the

1. OCLC NACO macro (made available in June 1999);
2. OCLC CatME for real-time upload of bibliographic records; and/or
3. RLG Authority Record Assistant.

The survey was distributed to the approximate 300 PCC members, and the total number of respondents was 57 (about 20%). 60% of those responding are users of the OCLC NACO macro. Of the non- users, 61% do not use OCLC to contribute their NACO records. Awareness of the OCLC macro is high, and comments indicate it is viewed as a big time saver. In contrast, only 4% of those responding are users of CatME real time upload. Comments indicate that non-users either use other means to upload records, or still find it easy and convenient to create records in directly in OCLC. 21% of those responding are users of the RLG Authority Record Assistant. 84% of non- users do not use RLIN to contribute their authority records. Comments indicate the ARA has been very positively received. Reactions to the Z39.50 option are especially good.

Ruth later gave a well-received presentation on the survey and its results at the PCC Participants Meeting .

Action: The committee suggested, given the low response rate, that the survey be repeated, perhaps by posting it to the Web and announcing its availability again via appropriate listservs. We decided that demonstrations of these tools would be provided as part of the PCC Participants program at the ALA Mid- winter Meeting in San Antonio next January.

CORC and the PCC -- Relationship? (Matthew Beacom)
Matthew Beacon led the group in a discussion of the potential relationship between PCC and CORC, a research project of OCLC and about 100 institutions engaged in developing tools for cataloging online resources in a cooperative environment. Karen took notes and Matthew used them immediately after the SCA meeting to address the PCC Participants Meeting. As might be expected, SCA members had many more questions than answers, chiefly is the PCC only about AACR2 and MARC21? In what ways might the CORC automated cataloging tools be more widely developed and shared, particularly among PCC libraries?

Action: We decided the SCA should continue to monitor CORC and the subsequent tools that may develop and to advocate collaboration as appropriate.

Automated Assistance with classification (Gary Strawn)
Gary had posed the following questions to SCA members in advance of the meeting:

• What work in automated assistance with classification or call number building has already been done?
• What is possible now or might be possible in the near future?
• What is the audience for any automated assistance? Performing which tasks?
• What automated assistance would be useful?
• How much automated assistance is desirable and/or safe?
• How relevant is previous work?
• Which classification schemes need to be supported?
• What differences in classification schemes would affect automated assistance?
• What differences in library systems would affect automated assistance?
• How can local practices be accommodated?
• What information resources are needed?
• What is the PCC/SCA role, if any?

We discussed several possible target audiences for an automated classification toolkit. Who might be the primary audience? Such a service might be directed to copy catalogers, original catalogers, or shelflisters. Our sense was that a tool for copy catalogers would have the greatest benefit at this time, but there was insufficient time to discuss the matter thoroughly. Suggestions for the tools themselves included a tool for converting Dewey to LC and vice versa, a tool to finish cuttering (what is the relationship to the OCLC macros available via the Access Suite?) and a tool to link LCSH and classification numbers (what does the Catalogers Desktop do already?).

Action: Karen agreed to draft a charge for an SCA task group, to be chaired by Gary Strawn, to study and propose options for an automated classification toolkit. The task group report would be due in one year and would describe

1. the contents of a classification toolkit,
2. the rationale for the choice of tools,
3. the intended audience for the toolkit,
4. the benefits,
5. other products with similar or related functionality, and the relationship of the proposed toolkit to those products,
6. a recommended time frame for implementation,
7. assumptions and/or anticipated impacts on local library systems and the utilities.

Matthew Beacom and Louise Ratliff expressed interest in being members of the task group, and it was suggested that Diane Vizine-Goetz or Lois Mai Chan be invited to participate.

Real Time Upload of Authority Records into RLIN (Ed Glazier and Matthew Beacom)
The PCC tactical plan calls for the development of real time upload of authority records created in a local library system to OCLC and RLIN. This functionality may be extremely important to some libraries, while others may prefer their current workflows (i.e., inputting directly into the utility of choice). We have almost no data to tell us how many or which libraries want or would use real time upload of authority records. Before taking action on this PCC tactical plan item, SCA members have agreed we need more information from NACO libraries.

Action: Based on a survey of RLG's NACO libraries undertaken by RLG last year, in which little or no interest in real time upload was expressed, RLG has not placed real time upload of authorities on its development agenda; the SCA concurred with this action. Karen will suggest to PCC Policy that the item be deleted or deferred in the PCC tactical plan. We agreed that a letter should be drafted to OCLC to affirm the importance of an authority record creation function in the Cataloging Microenhancer and CJK Software, along with the suggestion to survey OCLC NACO users about their interest in real time upload of authority records into the OCLC authority file.

Task Group on Journals in Aggregator Databases (Karen Calhoun)
Survey research of staff in PCC libraries suggests that a large majority want records for full-text journals in aggregations in their OPACs. Three-quarters of the respondents expressed keen interest in acquiring sets of such records. The SCA Task Group on Journals in Aggregator Databases has been preparing recommendations and plans to encourage the production and wide distribution of record sets to libraries.

SCA members reviewed a draft letter from the SCA and the SCA Task Group to OCLC concerning WorldCat Collection Sets. The letter urges OCLC to move forward as quickly as possible to meet the library community's need for WorldCat Collection sets for journals in publisher's and scholarly organization's aggregations. Several improvements to the letter were suggested.

Action: Karen will incorporate the committee's suggestions in a final draft of the letter and send it to OCLC (Done).

Pictures of some of the SCA members taken at this meeting by David Williamson.