F e d e r a l D e p o s i t o r y L i b r a r y P r o g r a m ADMINISTRATIVE NOTES Newsletter of the Federal Depository Library Program [ PDF version ] [ Back Issues ] --------------------------------------------------------------------- April 15, 2001 GP 3.16/3-2:22/06 (Vol. 22, no. 06) --------------------------------------------------------------------- Recommendations and Responses Depository Library Council to the Public Printer Fall 2000 Meeting 1. Cataloging Priorities Council recommends that GPO articulate its cataloging priorities for all publications, both tangible and online. Council further recommends that GPO identify the scope of its cataloging activities for online resources; i.e., what will be cataloged, what will not, and whether records for tangible publications will be updated when electronic versions are discovered. Rationale: Federal depository libraries can make best use of both GPO cataloging records and local staff resources when they are able to dovetail their own work flows and procedures with those used by the GPO Cataloging Branch. Libraries can plan activities such as enhancement of GPO records with URLs for online versions if they know whether or not GPO will add PURLs/URLs to its records retrospectively, or they can catalog online resources that are not a priority for GPO Cataloging. Response: The scope of GPO's cataloging responsibilities is codified in 44 U.S.C. § 1710 and 1711, which requires a "comprehensive index of public documents" that must represent all publications published by all U.S. Government agencies. Within this universe of potential resources we apply judgment to identify publications of immediate or continuing public interest and assign them highest priority cataloging irrespective of publishing agency, format, or media. GPO Cataloging Priorities (from highest to lowest) 1. Publications of immediate or continuing public interest, irrespective of publisher, format, or media. 2. Publications sold by GPO. 3. Other publications distributed or made accessible to depository libraries. 4. Technical reports, irrespective of publishing agency or content. 5. Titles not distributed or made accessible to depository libraries. 6. Titles included in a series or other larger body of work for which bibliographic control is provided by another Federal agency. High priority levels are one and two in this list, given the close association between public interest and many of the publications chosen for the Sales Program. GPO catalogs online Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP) publications at partner sites and U.S. Government databases using the same priority system. In general it is GPO's policy to create a cataloging record based on the format that was distributed or made accessible via the FDLP. Therefore, if a publication is included in the FDLP solely in online format, GPO will create a cataloging record for the online version, and appropriate record links will be made from a record describing a physical manifestation of the same content. All other factors being equal, preference is given to an online version of a high priority title distributed to libraries solely in online format rather than to the same title in other media. When high priority publications are distributed in physical format and are also available online, both the physical version and the online version are considered high priority. In this circumstance, a cataloging record for the physical version may also include the title, access information and the PURL (Persistent Uniform Resource Locator) for the online version. Records representing physical forms of high priority titles will be updated as online versions are discovered, as long as such efforts do not impede processing of uncataloged high priority work. Record updates of high priority resources will take precedence over cataloging works of less than high priority. 2. GPO Participation in Government-wide Initiatives Council recommends that GPO continue to interact with agency and interagency initiatives that focus on access to government information utilizing new and emerging technologies. Rationale: GPO has much to offer new information access initiatives given its experience in providing government information through the FDLP. FirstGov is the latest in a series of government initiatives that would benefit from the consultation and assistance of GPO in such areas as metadata, PURLs/URLs, Web site design for public access, Web search engines, and policies such as permanent public access. Response: GPO is involved in numerous Federal Government initiatives utilizing new and emerging technologies to improve access to published Government information. Among the activities in which GPO is participating or monitoring are: o CENDI, the Commerce, Energy, NASA, Defense, and Interior technical information providers' group. o Federal Library and Information Center Committee (FLICC), including GPO staff chairing the Personnel and Education Working Groups. o Federal Publishers' Committee. o Federal Webmasters' Consortium. o FirstGov. o National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) strategic plan review. o National Commission on Libraries and Information Science (NCLIS) "Comprehensive Assessment of Public Information Dissemination." o Permanent Public Access (PPA) Working Group. o U.S. Dept. of Agriculture Digital Publications Preservation Steering Committee. o U.S. Federal Government Information Clearinghouse Partnership. o U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) study of Superintendent of Documents' operations. In addition, GPO is also involved in several related non-governmental initiatives, including: o ALA GODORT AD Hoc Committee on Digitization of Government Information o Cartographic Users Advisory Council. o Coalition for Networked Information (CNI). o Council on Professional Associations on Federal Statistics (COPAFS). o OCLC Cooperative Online Resources Catalog (CORC) project. o OCLC/GPO digital archiving project. 3. PURL Identification Council recommends that GPO enhance the online versions of Administrative Notes Technical Supplement and WEBTech Notes by adding a GPO PURL server search box so that URLs may be searched easily to identify associated PURLs. Council further recommends that the URL for the GPO PURL Server Search page be published in each issue of the paper format Administrative Notes Technical Supplement to aid FDLP library staff in resolving PURL issues. Rationale: Council is aware that many FDLP libraries wish to add PURLs to their catalogs and Web pages when Electronic Library (EL) titles are announced in Administrative Notes Technical Supplement. Recognizing that the time lag between discovery of online titles and PURL assignment would result in an unacceptable delay if inclusion of PURLs were required for announcement of online titles in Administrative Notes Technical Supplement, Council suggests this solution to support timely announcement of accurate information. Response: The Library Programs Service (LPS) continues its efforts to integrate the use of PURLs in the numerous products and services that are available to the Federal Depository Library community. Recently several applications have been enhanced to include access to PURL resources. Beginning with the January 31, 2001 issue of the online version of the Administrative Notes Technical Supplement, a link was created to direct users to the PURL server. Additionally, a PURL search box has been added to the WEBTech Notes search screen on the FDLP Desktop at http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/fdlp/tools/webtech.html. These changes will enable users to quickly identify GPO assigned PURLs for online resources in the FDLP Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC). 4. Policy and the Infrastructure for Permanent Public Access Council recommends that GPO, with assistance from a Council working group and selected members of the depository community, examine policy and infrastructure necessary for the hosting and maintenance at multiple FDLP sites of digital government information for the purpose of providing no-fee permanent public access. Rationale: In light of the dramatic increase in online products, there is a need to identify the policies and infrastructure necessary to accelerate the partnership processes. Council believes that the establishment of a working group, consisting of the Council Electronic Preservation Committee and selected experts from the depository community, would assist GPO in accomplishing the recommendation. The working group should consult with content partners and others involved in digital preservation for their experiences relating to costs and lessons learned. The issues to be examined should include: o Official status and authenticity o Currency (maintenance and updating of serial files) o Integrity and viability of files o Costs involved (to include public services) o File types (source files, PDF, text, HTML, etc.) o Redundancy (mirror sites). Response: A working group has been formed, under the leadership of Donna Koepp, consisting of Council members Cathy Hartman, Greta Marlatt, Mary Redmond, and John Stevenson; and Chuck Eckman (Stanford), Barbara Levergood (Univ. of North Carolina Chapel Hill), Tim Byrne (Univ. of Colorado), and Elizabeth Cowell (Univ. of California San Diego). A preliminary meeting was held at ALA Midwinter in Washington. The group will address the six specific concerns in the charge, and will give a progress report at the Council meeting in April in San Antonio. Based on an upsurge of recent interest and activity in the FDLP community, GPO has requested that the WG give special attention to local and consortial projects to digitize older or fugitive government information and to advise GPO on the relationship of such projects to the six areas of concern and to the FDLP in general. 5. Draft Superintendent of Documents Policy Statement Council recommends that GPO proceed with the draft Superintendent of Documents (SOD) Policy Statement dated October 6, 2000. We further recommend that GPO consider a review of the definitions listed in the policy, a clarification of the concepts therein, and an expansion of the essential titles to be available for selection in paper. Rationale: Council understands that GPO must take serious steps to balance their budget in light of the $2 million budget reduction directed by Congress. However, the policy can be clarified in the following ways: 1) adding and defining the term announcement and reviewing the definitions for dissemination and distribution in relation to the term announcement; 2) adding the term online product to parallel the term tangible product; 3) reviewing the entire document to reflect these new and changed definitions; and 4) editing and amending the content as Council discussed. Council is concerned that the list of essential titles needs broader input from the depository community. Council requests that interested parties submit additional titles for consideration to Laurie Hall by November 10, 2000. Response: The Superintendent of Documents' policy statement on "Dissemination/Distribution Policy for the FDLP" (SOD 71) and the related list of "Essential Titles for Public Use in Paper Format" were presented in draft form and discussed at the fall 2000 Council meeting. The discussions at the meeting resulted in several suggestions for clarifying the draft. LPS staff incorporated the substance and spirit of the discussions at Council and input received as a result of posting the draft to GOVDOC-L. These are important working documents for LPS staff to use in acquiring publications for the FDLP, and are resulting in a more predictable decision-making process. SOD 71 has been published in Administrative Notes, and is available on the FDLP Desktop at http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/fdlp/pubs/sod71.html. The expanded list of "Essential Titles for Public Use in Paper Format" is also available on the FDLP Desktop, at http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/fdlp/pubs/estitles.html. The List contains titles of 42 publications or series that GPO is committed to keeping available for selection in paper format as long as those titles continue to be issued in paper by the publishing agency. These specific titles and series exemplify the application of SOD 71. In October and November LPS received comments and suggestions from the depository library community for the list. LPS received suggestions from 55 persons, recommending 207 specific titles as essential for distribution in paper. Only 105 of the 207 titles were recommended by more than one person. Of the 207 specific titles recommended, we added 22 to the "Essential Titles" list, including the open-ended category for decennial census publications. All of the other suggestions were also considered, with the following results: 1. Many of the remaining suggested titles and categories of publications meet the special conditions or needs categories identified in the policy statement, which states that publications in such categories will be distributed in paper. For example, military history titles are included in the "titles of historical significance" clause in policy statement part 4.(b). 2. Other recommended titles, such as the Bureau of Labor Statistics' National Compensation Survey, are not specifically cited on the list because they are considered to be of "significant reference value to most types of FDLP libraries." 3. Some suggested titles did not address the choice between dissemination in paper or online. For example, there were suggestions to include titles that are currently distributed in microfiche. 4. The remaining suggested titles not addressed above will not necessarily be migrated to online dissemination only. They are, however, subject to being migrated to online format as funding or other circumstances change. 6. Official Status of Online Bills Council recommends that GPO work with the Clerk of the House and the Secretary of the Senate to certify the official status of Congressional bills available through GPO Access. Council requests that GPO report on their progress at the spring 2001 meeting of the Depository Library Council. Council further recommends as an interim solution that GPO add a statement on applicable Web pages that the official print bills are produced from the same source as the online products available on GPO Access. Rationale: It is the sense of Council that users need to be assured of the official status of the online Congressional bills. We believe that this can be accomplished by a certification statement similar to that used by the National Archives and Records Administration on GPO Access for the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations. Response: The printed versions of Congressional bills produced by GPO have long been recognized by both Congress and the Courts as the official versions of these important instruments. In making Congressional bills available online through GPO Access, GPO has worked diligently to ensure that the digital versions are exact duplicates of the printed ones. As a result, users downloading a given bill from GPO Access can be assured that they are being sent the same official information. To further increase this assurance, GPO is in the process of procuring public key infrastructure (PKI) technology that will ensure that the official information being downloaded from GPO Access arrives at the user's terminal without being tampered with. This PKI solution will enable GPO to certify that the user is receiving an unaltered copy of the official Congressional bills that reside on GPO Access. Through the use of a free reader application the user can validate that the official text transmitted from GPO Access has arrived at their computer locked and unchanged. They can then unlock it at their leisure and use it as they see fit. GPO has been pursuing a broad solution that will assure that users have received the complete and accurate contents of all of the products on GPO Access. While neither this action, nor anything else that GPO can do will force acceptance of electronic versions by outside parties, it is the most positive means of guaranteeing that the user has received the same official text that appeared in the print version. Hopefully, it will also serve as the proof that is needed to foster the acceptance of the electronic version in official matters. 7. Identification of Online Products for Inclusion in the FDLP Council recommends that GPO establish a working group for the purpose of tracking selected agency Web sites for online-only government publications. The goals of the working group would be to determine the scope of agency online publishing, recommend priorities for inclusion in the FDLP, and examine other issues as identified by the working group. Rationale: Recent trends by government agencies toward exclusive use of the Internet to publish information have challenged the FDLP, as information dissemination is very different in the digital environment. GPO needs to bring these resources into the FDLP. However, GPO's resources to discover these products are limited. Therefore, Council believes that the depository community should participate in bringing these documents into the FDLP. The above working group will plan this pilot project, seek volunteers, and implement and manage this undertaking. Response: A working group, consisting of approximately 30 volunteers and chaired by Diane Eidelman, a former member of Council, has been formed to work with LPS to increase the number of electronic resources included in the FDLP Electronic Collection. Fugitive online resources will be identified from periodic reviews of selected agency websites. To make maximum use of the information this group will provide (titles, URLs, and OCLC records, if available) LPS has established a counterpart team that includes catalogers, publications management specialists, and other LPS staff. The LPS team will respond to information conveyed to it by the online fugitives working group and from other sources. LPS is developing operational guidelines for additional information that will provide guidance to the working group and will assist LPS in processing the discovered online fugitives and adding them to the FDLP Electronic Collection.