Skip to Search

DRAFT

IR Implementation Group

Minutes / March 10th, 2006 Meeting

DRAFT

IR Implementation Group

Minutes / March 10th, 2006 Meeting

Present: Cathy Martyniak, Carl Van Ness, Suzy Covey, Vernon Kisling, Winston Harris, Cecilia Botero, Stephanie Haas, Priscilla Williams, Martha Hruska (guest), Rick Donnelly, Legal Information Center (guest)

1. Cathy welcomed Martha Hruska and Rick Donnelly to the meeting.

2. Announcement: Please attend Mark’s metadata walkthrough presentation, Monday, March 20, 1:00-2:00 p.m., MSLL107

3. Priscilla was assigned to take minutes at this meeting.

4. Minutes from the February meeting were approved. 

5. Request for policy statement on IR content and format by Feb. 28 th

Most of our time was spent discussing the policy statement being drafted for the IR. Martha was invited to lead the discussion on her request to develop a policy statement on IR content and format. Looking forward to the development of a statement for UFIR Martha reviewed MIT’s statements and shared parts of the statements from MIT’s documentation with the group. She says “although we may not initially be able to use what MIT we should be looking in that direction.”

In response to a question, Martha noted that MIT’s documentation includes policy on copyright.

Stephanie commented that she was a little hesitant about writing policy for faculty telling them what they can and cannot submit at this point in the development of the IR.

Cathy distributed copies of the draft policy statement that had been revised by the group and further revised by Martha and Cathy. Cathy stated the policy statement currently under development is intended as a place holder.

Suggestions were made for further revisions to the statement.

Discussion:

Stephanie distributed 2 documents to the group. “Phased development of the UF Institutional Repository: an update” and “Criteria related to the identification, solicitation, and disposition of faculty.”

More discussion on the policy statement: The policy statement needs to address or clarify the born digital/digital aspects of faculty papers for submittal (Cecilia)

Policy statement should address what the IR is and what will be collected in the IR.

Martha pointed out that one of the attractions for the IR would be the archiving done by FCLA

I asked Rick to comment on what he thought faculty may consider as crucial information to know before submitting papers to the IR. Rick thought that faculty would want to know: What’s in the IR for me and how much of the submittal work needs to be done by me. Rick also wanted to know where will the IR eventually wind up and who will host the IR?

Cathy described for Cecilia and Rick the process used to select the 100 documents that we have already selected for IR submittal. She asked that they begin an environmental scan of the digital documents produced in their respective areas in order to create a list of possible titles for inclusion in the IR.

6. Software requirements specification. Cathy talked briefly about the software specifications template. She’ll talk more about his at our next meeting.

TO DO:

Stephanie, Cathy and Priscilla will work on revising the draft policy statement with the aim of discussing with Library COuncil at its next meeting.

Cathy, Priscilla and Carl will work on cataloging issues for IR submittals included in ALEPH

 

The meeting adjourned at 11:35 a.m.

Next meeting is April 14 at 10:00 – 11:00 a.m., LE Conference Room

Submitted by Priscilla Williams, edits my Martha Hruska

 

 

Return to Main IR-IG page

University of Florida Home Page