Resource Discovery Meeting Minutes

NOTE: The following minutes are unapproved and will be formally agreed at the next meeting of the working group.

1. Welcome, Apologies for Absence and Membership Update

Present: William Marsterson (Chair - WM), Gavin Beattie (GB), John Gilby (Secretary - JG), Robert Hall (RH), Marion Peulevé (MP), Maureen Wade (MW).

Apologies: Stewart Brownrigg (SB), Rosemary Lynch (RL).

WM informed everyone that Brian Murphy and Catriona Cannon had left the group and all agreed that their contribution will be missed. Ideas were discussed on what sort of skills and experiences the group required in trying to recruit new members bearing in mind the Consortium rules governing the working groups. The group agreed to seek two new members, one ideally a head of service, the other having an information services role.

Action 1.1 MW to seek appropriate volunteers for the group.

2. Approval of Previous Meeting Minutes

The minutes from 15 June 2007 were approved.

3. Action Update and Matters Arising

Actions from the previous meeting held on 15 June 2007 are summarised below:

Action 3.1 Continues - JG to progress InforM25 'Landscaping' document.

Action 3.2 Continues - JG to look into the Talis Directory further and also about the feasibility of using the existing Find-a-library data/system with Google Maps.

Action 3.3 Complete - See notes under 3b below.

Action 4.1 Continues as New Action 3.3 - JG to send a revised web statistics requirement specification to the group for approval.

Action 5.1 Complete - New group action plan incorporated in overall M25 plan for 2007-8, see Item 6 below.

Action 5.2 Deferred - Group agreed to defer promotion of InforM25 to JISC and the RIN for the time being.

Action 5.3 Complete - See notes under 3c below.

Action 8.1 Complete - Future group meetings arranged.

3a. Update on HEFCE Shared Services Bid - WAM25

MW gave a verbal update on a recent positive meeting she and JG had with JISC who were looking after bids on behalf of HEFCE. The WAM25 bid requires further refinement and the group members were encouraged to offer details of suitable consultants capable of undertaking the necessary feasibility study work.

3b. Update on AIM25 Development Project

MW confirmed that AIM25 had been successful in obtaining a grant from the University of London VC Discretionary Fund for developing the AIM25 service. The M25 Steering Group had previously agreed to co-fund development of interoperability between InforM25 and AIM25. It was not clear when the project would start.
Action 3.4 JG to mail AIM25 offering WM as the Consortium's Steering Group representative and JG as technical representative.

3c. CPD25 Organised InforM25 Promotion

JG verbally updated the group on recent discussions and arrangements for events organised by CPD25. Ideas were for 3-4 half-day Roadshows to promote InforM25 to subject librarians and like. Programme likely to be:

• Introduction and themed demo of InforM25 (JG)
• Case study – session by a librarian comparing and contrasting available services
• Break to allow people to use InforM25 for themselves
• Breakout sessions – topics to be decided but maybe relating to future M25 strategy or possible service developments
• Summary & close

Next Steps – further meeting to finalise details, decide on venues and start planning a follow-up event aimed at systems & technical services librarians in the Spring. Urgent need to involved CPD25 more and to involve others including possible case study presenters.

The group discussed the best way forwards with the events.
Action 3.5 MW to mail relevant CPD25 Task Group to move things forward.

3d. Index Data Metaproxy

JG noted that following on from last years investigation into the Index Data product Metaproxy – software that would allow “Search-catalogues” to itself become a Z39.50 server/target capable of being searched by other services such as CAIRNS or institutional RD systems – the product is now available open source. Although there would still be a need for customisation, the cost of implementing the system was now significantly reduced.

4. M25 Systems Team Manager's Report

4a. General Report

JG highlighted significant items of note from his circulated report (No.16) and also gave a verbal update including:

• more responses received for Find-a-library updates, now heard from 37 out of 57 members
• replacing the SRX and UKLP schemes data on Visit-a-library had progressed, was complex and likely to be completed in a couple of weeks
• progress with Birkbeck and RVC and their ULS data had progressed significantly and were expected to be available on the ULS in the near future

4b. Services Membership Summary

As agreed at the last meeting, JG had circulated a summary of institutional membership of InforM25 services. Clarification was sought on the status of the Institute of Cancer Research - historically have contributed to the ULS and still present on the live service though they have never been a member of M25 and thus not on the other InforM25 services. The group also asked for details of what problems institutional firewalls can give Search-catalogues. JG commented that the Z39.50 searching requires 2-way communication between the M25 server and the server of the member institution's library system. Often an institutional firewall prevents this connection and negotiation is required (by JG) to enable the connection, and hence searching, to occur.

4c. Usage Statistics and Z-clients

JG then gave a short demonstration of progress achieved with website usage statistics using Google Analytics. All three websites now have embedded javascript code which generates data for Google Analytics to produce the reports. Specific comments included:

• reports show numbers of visits over selectable time periods broken down to different parts of the websites (the ULS was the most popular of the services which concurs with earlier Webalizer work)
• a high 'bounce' rate (where user goes to a page then immediately navigates away from that page) was noted for some of the pages
• the reports do show that the websites are being well used
• further work with the configuration will produce more meaningful data

JG was unable to show progress with new Z39.50 clients for the ULS and Search-catalogues due to a technical problem but stated that progress had been made. The software driving the services will have much more commonality making future maintenance easier and the user interfaces use more modern HTML/coding such that the pages will appear to the user much quicker. The opportunity was also being taken to reduce the amount of text on the screen.

4d. Systems Team Priorities

MW summarised JG's workload as the sole member of the Systems Team and the issue was discussed by the group. It was acknowledged that as the Consortium has grown, maintenance activities on the websites have increased but the Systems Team has remained the same for a number of years and that there was an inherent risk in having so much expertise in a single person. Difficulty was experienced in carrying out development work in particular.

There were two different options suggested by the group to take forward to the Steering Group to assist with the growing workload. One idea was to get in occasional temporary help with specific projects, much like as was done with the Subject List mini-project last winter. The other, proposed by RH, was, in recognition of the growing size of the M25, to ask the Steering Group to fund an additional 0.5FTE post for the team. It was also said that this could be considered in the context of a merged staffing team to cover the (current) three arms of the Consortium (Admin., Systems and CPD25). It was noted that the Systems Team has a wider remit than issues appropriate to the RDWG and that with the increasing use and complexity of the various websites, it may be beneficial to arrange for someone to be a website manager.

Action 4.1 WM to approach Steering Group regarding additional effort for the Systems Team

Action 4.2 JG to send group a summary of development and maintenance tasks to help the group prioritise.

5. Systems Team Annual Report & Risk Analysis

JG invited feedback on his previously circulated Annual Report that showed performance in relation to the Service Delivery Plan. The group agreed that the Consortium gets very good value from the team and that the report provides sound evidence of the work carried out. The report was accepted and will be published on the M25 website and sent to the Steering Group.

The group reviewed the Resource Discovery Risk Analysis document and agreed some small changes. The document will go the Steering Group for information.

6. RDWG Contribution to M25 Action Plan

The group considered the draft M25 Mission Strategic Objectives and Action Plan document and it was noted that a number of points in the group's originally agreed action plan were not in the document. It was agreed that the group drop e-learning and repositories from its remit as these were adequately covered elsewhere. It was also noted that pending an external review of M25 services in 2008-9, that the group will need to define the review and apply for funds before the M25 AGM in June 2008.

7. AOB

None.

8. Future Meetings

Future meetings at LSE Library, 2pm are on 27 November 2007, 19 February 2008 and Late April/May 2008.

Action 8.1 JG to arrange April/May 2008 meeting.

Minutes by JG.