All,

 

We couldn’t fit this on this week’s PC agenda but we’re keeping it on our list for a future date.

 

Paula

 

From: Aaron Trehub [mailto:trehuaj@auburn.edu]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2018 5:35 PM
To: speccoll-archives@ole-lists.openlibraryfoundation.org
Cc: Sullenger, Paula A <psullenger@library.tamu.edu>; Jesse Koennecke <jtk1@cornell.edu>; Michael Winkler <mdw233@cornell.edu>
Subject: RE: SpecColl_Archives Taking stock of our work to date

 

Thanks, Peter. I understand and support the current focus getting a basic FOLIO implementation spun up, with all that that entails in terms of basic library services (e.g. circulating books). So some form of hibernation may be in the cards for the SC&A group. Still, I’d like to put the question of how to integrate SC&A and other communities of interest into FOLIO on the PC’s agenda, with the SC&A case as a fairly well-developed example.

 

Best,

 

Aaron

 

From: speccoll-archives@ole-lists.openlibraryfoundation.org <speccoll-archives@ole-lists.openlibraryfoundation.org> On Behalf Of Peter Murray
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2018 3:31 PM
To: speccoll-archives@ole-lists.openlibraryfoundation.org
Cc: Paula Sullenger <psullenger@library.tamu.edu>; Jesse Koennecke <jtk1@cornell.edu>; Michael Winkler <mdw233@cornell.edu>
Subject: Re: SpecColl_Archives Taking stock of our work to date

 

Hello all,

 

That is a great summary Aaron.  SC&A is not the only area of interest that is feeling the desire for activity in FOLIO but is lacking a path forward...I think the desires for repository integration are in much the same spot.  The pressure in the community to make FOLIO "real" for a library has many of us focusing on more mundane things like physical circulation.  I just re-read the August paper with the outline of desires and am re-realizing that there are many good ideas there, but there isn't a clear path or example for other open source projects to follow for getting integration into FOLIO -- there is still much activity to be done to get the basic platform environment to a place where other project can start the integration process.

 

Maybe it is time for hibernate for a quarter or two while that work is done.

 


Peter

On Oct 19, 2018, 4:21 PM -0400, Aaron Trehub <trehuaj@auburn.edu>, wrote:

All,

 

Again, I don’t have anything new to report on the SC&A front this week. However, I think it would be useful for us to review where the SC&A WG is now and get a sense of how or whether the group would like to proceed. Since attendance on the weekly calls has been dropping, I thought that e-mail would be the best way to air these questions.

 

Here’s a nutshell summary of the WG’s work this year:

 

The WG adopted its charge and began work on January 29, 2018. It has had 28 Zoom meetings to date, including two presentations (on the FOLIO project and on ArchivesSpace).

The WG submitted its first progress report (with recommendations) to the FOLIO PC in May 2018.

The WG submitted a white paper on SC&A-specific features and desiderata to the FOLIO PC in September 2018. The PC has not discussed this document yet—other matters have taken precedence in the past few weeks—but I will ask Paula Sullenger to add it to the call agenda at the earliest opportunity.

 

All three documents—the original charge, the progress report, and the white paper—are available on the SC&A Wiki at https://wiki.folio.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=7833640. A second progress report is due at the end of this year/beginning of 2019.

 

Our May 2018 progress report contained five recommendations:

 

That the SC&A WG continue to work in its current form at least through the end of 2018, with its focus shifting to evaluating existing SC&A software solutions and identifying possible points of connection (e.g. through documented APIs) with FOLIO instead of trying to design a new SC&A system from the ground up.

That the FOLIO PC spin up test versions of ArchivesSpace, AtoM, and (if possible) Calm. For its part, the SC&A WG will arrange live demonstrations of these and other SC&A software solutions.

That the WG identify SC&A resource people and product specialists and ask them to serve as liaisons to FOLIO developers and developer teams.

Given the numerous claims on people's time and attention, forming a "floating SC&A SIG" is probably not realistic at this point. Instead, we recommend that the WG draft and distribute a position paper on SC&A issues in order to get and keep these issues in front of the other FOLIO SIGs. That said, the WG floated the idea of forming a so-called an umbrella "Integration SIG" for the SC&A community and other library communities (e.g. Art and Architecture, Corporate, Media, Music, and Law) that have specialized requirements.

That the WG initiate conversations with potential new developers (e.g. Arkivum and Hermesz-SOFT). We also recommend that the WG reach out to potential new members among SC&A specialists in Europe, Mexico, and other regions or countries where FOLIO is active.

 

We have made progress on some of these recommendations, but still need to act on the others. For example: we’ve identified some development needs having to do with ArchivesSpace, Aeon, and other widely used SC&A systems. The challenge now would be to identify product owners (in FOLIO-speak) for these items and to get them in front of a FOLIO development team or—more realistically, given FOLIO’s current focus on finishing core development for early implementers—on the docket for future development. This will almost certainly involve transitioning from a loose exploratory working group to a SIG of some sort. It is not clear to me that that is where this group would like to go.

 

So, here are some options. Feel free to suggest others.

 

Declare that the SC&A WG has more than fulfilled its original charge and stand the group down. Members who are interested in committing time and resources to further exploration and development can do so together or on their own.

Stay the course and continue working on the recommendations listed above and subsequent suggestions (e.g. weekly reports from the PC, SIGs, early implementers, and/or occasional guest speakers).

Draft a new charge, appoint a new convener, and re-group in 2019.

 

Please feel free to respond to the group or to me individually. I’d still like to aim for an all-hands call on Monday, November 12.

 

Thanks,

 

Aaron

 

Aaron Trehub

Assistant Dean for Technology and Head, Special Collections & Archives

Auburn University Libraries

231 Mell Street, RBD Library

Auburn, AL 36849-5606 USA

+(334) 844-1707 office

+(334) 750-1695 mobile

Skype: ajtrehub

E-mail: trehuaj@auburn.edu

https://orcid.org/sites/default/files/images/orcid_16x16.giforcid.org/0000-0002-0296-5792

You received this message because you are subscribed to OLE Mailing List "speccollarchives".
To unsubscribe from this list and stop receiving emails from it, follow this link: http://archives.simplelists.com.
To post to this group, send email to
speccoll-archives@ole-lists.openlibraryfoundation.org
<mailto:speccoll-archives@ole-lists.openlibraryfoundation.org>.
Visit this group at
https://ole-lists.openlibraryfoundation.org<https://ole-lists.openlibraryfoundation.org>. lists.openlibraryfoundation.org>
.

You received this message because you are subscribed to OLE Mailing List "speccollarchives".
To unsubscribe from this list and stop receiving emails from it, follow this link: http://www.simplelists.com/confirm.php?u=ZEYH8Aqp0ii2Opxxq4Q107ZxKf5pLR4F.
To post to this group, send email to
speccoll-archives@ole-lists.openlibraryfoundation.org
<mailto:speccoll-archives@ole-lists.openlibraryfoundation.org>.
Visit this group at
https://ole-lists.openlibraryfoundation.org<https://ole-lists.openlibraryfoundation.org>. lists.openlibraryfoundation.org>
.