[17:56] Geekster Sugarbeet: cindy - did you get a chance to look at cataloging the religious resources? [17:56] Cindy Elkhart: yes [17:56] Cindy Elkhart: but i wasn't sure what need to be done [17:56] Cindy Elkhart: liked the spread sheet [17:57] Cindy Elkhart: I did put my name down on some [17:58] Geekster Sugarbeet: yes, i saw that - maybe we (the how group) should meet to talk about how to fill out the sheet - you weren't the only one with questions.. [17:58] Cindy Elkhart: ok [17:59] Cindy Elkhart: Hi Dinnie [17:59] Geekster Sugarbeet: hi dinnie [17:59] Dinnie Devonshire: Hi folks [18:00] Dinnie Devonshire: Yes, JJ is opening two exhibits/events [18:00] Cindy Elkhart: Rocky is on his way [18:00] Geekster Sugarbeet: yes, jj is an extremely busy guy! [18:01] Geekster Sugarbeet: well - it's about 6pm - shall we go over & start the meeting? [18:01] Cindy Elkhart: sure [18:03] Cindy Elkhart: Hi Rocky [18:03] Geekster Sugarbeet: rocky - no standing on the table :-) [18:03] Rocky Vallejo: what an entrance! [18:03] Dinnie Devonshire: Well, you wont win the contest! [18:04] Rocky Vallejo: Has anyone sent a message to thr group offering TPs? [18:04] Rocky Vallejo: and IM [18:04] Geekster Sugarbeet: nope - i'm a loser [18:04] jwatso21 Book: Hardly anyone is online [18:04] Rocky Vallejo: I'd be happy to give it a try [18:04] Geekster Sugarbeet: rocky - that'd be great thx [18:05] Geekster Sugarbeet: in the meantime, shall we get started? [18:05] Geekster Sugarbeet: do we need to do introductions, or is everyone pretty familiar with each other? [18:05] Cindy Elkhart: . [18:06] Geekster Sugarbeet: rocky - just got yr im - thanks for sending it to the group. [18:06] Rocky Vallejo: sure... gotta learn how to spell building [18:06] Geekster Sugarbeet: OK - if were goood with names/faces, lets proceed to #2 on the agenda.. [18:07] Dinnie Devonshire: I must not be in the group, unless the Can/US border is closed :) [18:07] Rocky Vallejo: anybody gonna do the transcript? [18:07] Geekster Sugarbeet: discussion from the 'cataloging team' - [18:07] Geekster Sugarbeet: i'll do the transcript (i hope...) [18:07] Geekster Sugarbeet: anyone want to start that discussion? otherwise i'm gonna rant! [18:07] Geekster Sugarbeet: hi swann [18:08] Swann Proost: hello everyone [18:08] Geekster Sugarbeet: oops, and abbey too - didn't see you come in! [18:08] Abbey Zenith: Hi, snuck in late [18:08] Geekster Sugarbeet: ok - i "cataloged" some of the atheism/agnostic web links in the Religious resouces/peace garden [18:09] Geekster Sugarbeet: It's not clear to me why we would want to "catalog" the individual websites/links as opposed to the notecards they are on [18:09] Abbey Zenith: good point [18:09] Geekster Sugarbeet: this gets into the WHAT - so feel free to jump in dinnie/swann... [18:10] Dinnie Devonshire: I always thought that the notecard broad subjects would be what we would treat. Then if folks look at the card itself, they can have the links [18:10] Swann Proost: i was thinking about this this afternoon ... [18:10] Geekster Sugarbeet: that's what i think would work best as well... [18:10] Swann Proost: i was trying to take what dinnie did and put it into the matrix ... [18:11] Swann Proost: i realixed that she was thinking of this differently than i was ... [18:11] Dinnie Devonshire: Ah good to know :) [18:11] Swann Proost: by 'collections' i was thinking the individual items within a library ... [18:11] Swann Proost: whereas i think dinnie was separating out the items from the collection .... [18:12] Swann Proost: that is, the item would be teh analytic part of the collection level record [18:12] Swann Proost: is that right, dinnie? [18:12] Damek Tretiak is Online [18:12] Dinnie Devonshire: Yes, I think thats what I was thinking. It perhaps all depends on WHAT the thing is. [18:12] Swann Proost: i was also looking at this from a practical point of view ... [18:12] Dinnie Devonshire: Some collections will only need treatment at the collection level; for other things, we would need to break into analytics of the parts or items within. [18:13] Swann Proost: how much effort would be required to get anything useful done ... [18:13] Geekster Sugarbeet: exactly [18:13] Swann Proost: if one starts to catalog at the item level, one can quickly become overwhelmed unless we all quit our day jobs [18:13] Dinnie Devonshire: I agree. And I cant afford that! [18:13] Swann Proost: me either [18:14] Dinnie Devonshire: What we need to do is imagine what the person really wants. [18:14] Geekster Sugarbeet: right! ok - what's with the standing on the table?! [18:14] Swann Proost: damek is hehre to dance for us on the table [18:14] jwatso21 Book: Sorry - I always tp people onto the table : ) [18:14] Dinnie Devonshire: Do they want to be led to some stuff on a topic or theme and plow around, or are they looking specifically for something discrete? [18:14] Swann Proost: heh [18:14] Damek Tretiak: lol...thought I'd give you a show on my entrance. :-) [18:14] Swann Proost: normally i pay good money to see this, damek [18:15] Dinnie Devonshire: Rocky already tried that and didnt win the prize either. [18:15] Damek Tretiak: I'm normally...very very shy. ;-) [18:15] Swann Proost: heh [18:15] Cindy Elkhart: :) [18:15] Rocky Vallejo: sigh... I shouldn't have tried a line dance [18:15] Damek Tretiak: :-) [18:16] Geekster Sugarbeet: ok - back to catalog reality [18:16] Swann Proost: can i ask one more fundamentals question? [18:16] Dinnie Devonshire: Sure [18:17] Geekster Sugarbeet: such as it is... couldn't we try to meet both needs - to a certian extent - collection level and item level (but not all items, i agree!) [18:17] Swann Proost: are we considering that the cataloging will take place by someone other than teh person putting hte collection together, or are we providing a framework that the collector can sue to make the colleciton self-cataloging? [18:17] Swann Proost: we would need to be very selective in terms of the item level i think ... we don't want to attempt to catalog the internet [18:18] Dinnie Devonshire: The latter. I think if we make it clear enough and simple enough, then they will want to do that. They will want their offerings and services to be found, after all. [18:18] jwatso21 Book: In the consumer health library, I'm responsible for cataloging but not for putting the collection together, Swann [18:18] Swann Proost: that is the SL consumer health library? [18:18] jwatso21 Book: yes [18:18] Swann Proost: ok [18:19] Swann Proost: maybe we should accommodate both [18:19] Swann Proost: actaul cataloging and a framework [18:19] Damek Tretiak: Looks like we need access levels taht include groups of people with varying degress of access. [18:19] Rocky Vallejo: I think what is cataloged at the item level might also be up to the person who coordinates a collection... I've cataloged the Gov Docs collection in Parvenu and will do the Geography Collection... I included all the URLs. Didnt' take me a week... one evening perhaps.. to do Gove Docs [18:19] jwatso21 Book: I agree [18:20] Damek Tretiak: A cataloger who is responsible for their own entries and and a manager who manages all collections and has greater control [18:20] Geekster Sugarbeet: damek - yes, i think the mechanics of how we're going to accomplish this is definitely going to have to be thought out [18:20] Dinnie Devonshire: As I said, it depends on the content and the intent of the "collection" [18:20] Dinnie Devonshire: If someone wants folks to find Sci-fi, then that may be sufficient. [18:20] Dinnie Devonshire: If someone wants to highlight the Azimov exhibit, then that would be specific. [18:20] Geekster Sugarbeet: how should we define collection level? [18:21] Rocky Vallejo: Is that possible within the current framework of SLQ... just "Science Fiction"? [18:21] jwatso21 Book: Does the system capture people's search terms, Damek? [18:21] Swann Proost: a collection is more than one? [18:21] Damek Tretiak: it's possible with the "tags" [18:21] Dinnie Devonshire: I think tags will be essential [18:21] Damek Tretiak: so if something is tagged with "SciFi" for instance, it would find those items [18:22] Swann Proost: tags being subject headings and classifications? [18:22] Damek Tretiak: jwatso21, yes it does capture all the terms used in search...they are also cataloged in a separate table so I can analyze them later [18:22] Geekster Sugarbeet: i'd like to see more specific SLQuery fields for locations general = info island for instance & specific = mystery manor [18:22] Damek Tretiak: the tags as they exist now, are more like the social tagging systems used on the web (re: delicious bookmarks) [18:22] Geekster Sugarbeet: that might allow for narrowing to specific locations / collection types? [18:23] Swann Proost: that's a good idea, geekster .. we should be able to let someone scope their search to a place [18:23] Dinnie Devonshire: Remember we had places as one type and collections as another. [18:23] Damek Tretiak: so, in addition to the specific location of a box you would also have a more generic location describing the facilitiy it's in, correct? [18:23] Geekster Sugarbeet: correct [18:23] Damek Tretiak: *facility [18:23] Dinnie Devonshire: So, if they are indexed as such we can find one or the other ... or both. [18:23] Swann Proost: damek, but we could create a list of authorized tags couldn't we? [18:24] Damek Tretiak: that's a good point, swann, right now tags are free and open. [18:24] Swann Proost: i think it is essential to have a single list ot work form [18:24] Damek Tretiak: it could be made part of the catalog manager's options...to manage the "available" tags [18:24] Swann Proost: can the system support cross references? [18:24] Damek Tretiak: so, a cataloger could only use the tags that the catalog manager approved [18:25] Geekster Sugarbeet: well, the "slq form?" has a list of prescribed tags - though i don't know if you put in non-prec tags & the system would still accept it.. damek? [18:25] Damek Tretiak: re: cross references, not currently. I'd need more information on how you envision that to be. [18:25] Dinnie Devonshire: Regarding tags, its been found that with a given tag cloiud to choose from, many folks will choose an existing tag rather than make a new one. [18:26] Damek Tretiak: geekster, correct. Currently the tags are free-form. To constrain them to a specific list would need a diff. mechansim for entering the data. [18:26] Swann Proost: but we could agree to an authorized list ... [18:26] Geekster Sugarbeet: yes, but right now we don't see a tag cloud. another issue is keywords - i'd like to see the ability to enter phrase tags [18:26] Swann Proost: teh system wouldn't have to mandate it per se [18:27] Geekster Sugarbeet: too many keywords have multiple meanings [18:27] jwatso21 Book: We will be adding Medical Subject terms to our records, but we could use free-form tags for this purpose [18:27] Damek Tretiak: tag clouds would be difficult inside sl right now, but it's avail on the website. [18:27] Geekster Sugarbeet: right jwatso - you could agree internally to follow some type of standard... [18:28] Damek Tretiak: so, perhaps we're back to looking at specific categories and then using tags as more free-form keywords [18:28] Damek Tretiak: keep in mind that all text in the title and description is also searchable [18:29] Dinnie Devonshire: I think we are having a bit of trouble with how many categories we will have, and how small or large they are. [18:29] Geekster Sugarbeet: yes, i feel a little like i have a tiger by the tail ;-) [18:29] Dinnie Devonshire: Will they be very large overarching categories (which would be useful for folks following a framework) [18:30] Damek Tretiak: i think it will important to make that distinction. [18:30] Damek Tretiak: tags are useful, but probably more so on a personal level [18:30] Dinnie Devonshire: or will they be many and very defined, which means that they will be a bit more difficult to decide on for assignment. [18:30] Damek Tretiak: for intance, if you look at the web tab on my profile and navigate to the "popular tags" section, you can see how varied the tags can become. [18:30] Damek Tretiak: of course, these are for the more general search engine [18:32] Geekster Sugarbeet: can we have a hierarchy of categories? from general (book/notecard/soundfile) to more specific? SLQuery does this to some extent already - but refine/extend categories? [18:32] Dinnie Devonshire: Sure, that would be good for those who are not cataloguers and are doing this. They would be able to work their way in. [18:33] Dinnie Devonshire: But we dont want it to end up being like assigning Dewey! [18:33] Damek Tretiak: yes, I'm in the process of adding new categories to the system. The current tag features are nic, but as I mentioned...better on a personal level. [18:33] jwatso21 Book: Can you use LCSH to help with this? [18:33] Swann Proost: i was thinking of something simpler than LCSH [18:34] Damek Tretiak: I think the key is to provide a list of very high level categories and a few sub-categories. Too much would be confusing for the average searcher. [18:34] Swann Proost: we might be shooting a gnat with a canon [18:34] Damek Tretiak: ...but this gets back to the question taht someone asked awhil back: who is the target audience? [18:34] Geekster Sugarbeet: me too. lcsh terms & mesh terms could be used in the tags - i agree with damek re high level & sub categories [18:34] Geekster Sugarbeet: nice short picklists would be great [18:35] Swann Proost: i'm assuming our audience is both the librarians servicing the collection and the general population coming to search on their own ... [18:35] Damek Tretiak: could someone explain what lcsh is? I'm not familiar with it. [18:35] Swann Proost: just lie other libraries [18:35] Dinnie Devonshire: We just did an exercise to categorize ref questions. I could map that out as a model. [18:35] jwatso21 Book: Library of Congress Subject Headings - sorry [18:35] Dinnie Devonshire: It totalled about 200 terms in two levels [18:35] Damek Tretiak: thank you :-) [18:35] Geekster Sugarbeet: dinnie that would be really helpful [18:36] Swann Proost: LCSH is a very very large set of subject headins .. a thesaurus of terms [18:36] Dinnie Devonshire: I will do that and send it in to you all. It was an interesting exercise and, like now, we did not want to go overboard on complexity or depth/heirarchy. [18:36] Damek Tretiak: it sounds like it might be a bit overwhelming to begin with (re: lcsh) [18:36] jwatso21 Book: I have to go. I'll be out of town for a month so thanks again for volunteering and I'll see you all when I get back [18:36] Swann Proost: i agree damek [18:37] Swann Proost: bye bye jwatso [18:37] Damek Tretiak: be well :-) [18:37] Dinnie Devonshire: OK jwatso. Travel safely :) [18:37] Geekster Sugarbeet: jwatso21 - thanks so much for getting the cat group started - have fun! [18:37] Abbey Zenith: Bye Jen :) [18:37] Cindy Elkhart: bye [18:37] jwatso21 Book is Offline [18:38] Damek Tretiak: ok, so now we have the arduous task of creating concrete lists of the categories and basic structure of how the system will be searchable. [18:38] Dinnie Devonshire: If you want to begin with thi list we did, I can get that out tomorrow probably. [18:39] Dinnie Devonshire: Sorry thats for subjects [18:39] Geekster Sugarbeet: that will have to be done at another time - dinnie's list will be a great place to start - but there's no way we're hashing it out now [18:39] Swann Proost: there is the Sears list of headings, but even that may be too much [18:39] Swann Proost: (is Sears still in existence?) [18:39] Dinnie Devonshire: Damek when you a=said categories, do you mean like places, books, exhibits, notecards, etc.? [18:40] Geekster Sugarbeet: swann - sears is even too much - yes it still exists! [18:40] Swann Proost: we should see if we can find a pre-existing list ... i don't really want to create one from scratch [18:40] Dinnie Devonshire: Thats why I offered ours. [18:40] Damek Tretiak: sorry...I was writing upa notecard to illustrate what I was thinking...if you give me a min. I'll send one out to everyone. I'm looking very high level right now. [18:41] Swann Proost: is 200 enough, dinnie? [18:41] Dinnie Devonshire: It has about 22 main categories. The rest are subs under those. [18:41] Dinnie Devonshire: It can be tweaked and added to, and some categories may be totally inappropriate for here. [18:41] Swann Proost: is it expandable if need be? [18:41] Swann Proost: ok [18:41] Dinnie Devonshire: It is very malleable. [18:41] Swann Proost: good [18:41] Swann Proost: are you national library of canada, dinnie? [18:41] Dinnie Devonshire: Yes [18:41] Swann Proost: ok [18:42] Geekster Sugarbeet: swann - i don't think we're locked into *anything* - we should be able to add to our heart's content - i'd think [18:43] Geekster Sugarbeet: but even if/when we decide the categories, the mechanics of cataloging (who what when & how) will still need to be hashed out. [18:43] Swann Proost: a process work flow needs to be established [18:44] Geekster Sugarbeet: I'm going to put Damek on the spot in a min - but before i do, did everyone get a chance to look over damek & my e-mail exchange re:infoboxes? [18:44] Dinnie Devonshire: yes [18:44] Swann Proost: yes. i wishi i understood it [18:44] Swann Proost: heh [18:44] Geekster Sugarbeet: mee too :-) [18:44] Rocky Vallejo: looked it over [18:44] Swann Proost: lol [18:45] Geekster Sugarbeet: frankly, i can't really understand it - maybe in part 'cause I haven't worked with it yet. [18:45] Swann Proost: yes, i agree .. i should have done the religious cataloging experience thing [18:45] Geekster Sugarbeet: still - the logistics of many infoboxes & many people maintaining them may be too difficult to accomplish.. [18:46] Dinnie Devonshire: I would think that for the stable collections and places and buildings with themes, the folks who "own" would be willing. [18:46] Dinnie Devonshire: The more ephemeral stuff like occasional art exhibits and such will be problematic. [18:47] Geekster Sugarbeet: so i'm looking to Damek to put on his slquery guru hat and see if there is an easier way to accomplish this... [18:48] Damek Tretiak: sorry...I"ll read back through the chat log in a min. this might be a really simple notecard, but sometimes I find it easier to look at it this way than through chat. Here's how I wa sseein gthe previous conversation [18:48] Damek Tretiak gave you Library Catalog Overview. [18:48] Damek Tretiak: did everyone get one? [18:48] Abbey Zenith: yes [18:48] Herb Moorhen: yep [18:48] Cindy Elkhart: yes [18:49] Rocky Vallejo: not I, Damek [18:49] Geekster Sugarbeet: yes [18:49] Damek Tretiak: on the "temporary" exhibits, it might be useful to use more of an "events" system. [18:49] Rocky Vallejo: got it [18:49] Damek Tretiak: those can then gracefully dissapear from the overall catalog search when they are no longer relevant [18:49] Dinnie Devonshire: For temporary, if we ask for an end date could we use that? [18:50] Dinnie Devonshire: Yes. [18:50] Damek Tretiak: yes, that's what my thought was. After the end date, the event related item would not longer show up in search. [18:50] Dinnie Devonshire: But, someone asked the question the other day, do we still want a record that the event took place? [18:51] Dinnie Devonshire: And that may be where the archiving aspect comes in. Christi could not make this meeting, but I am watching that corner here as well. [18:51] Geekster Sugarbeet: is the "catalog" the best place to record that info? [18:51] Damek Tretiak: you could still have the events available, but they wouldn't pollute the searches themselves. Items "attached" to an event would be viewable by viewing the event and then searcing on items related. [18:51] Dinnie Devonshire: For the time the event is live, probably yes so it may be found. After it goes, then it becomes archival and perhaps it is then Christi's group that sets the keep or not keep rules. [18:52] Geekster Sugarbeet: i think that might be a better strategy - the slq database is probably huge, but not limitless - [18:53] Dinnie Devonshire: An archival databse might be separate but would take expired SLQ items. [18:53] Abbey Zenith: Back to the who part of the cataloging (before we close) I think that the collections people could give lists of what they have created to a cataloger, but not be responsible for doing the actual programing into the SLQ. The cataloger would do that. If someone wants to do both, that would be an option. Collections is a time consuming project as is... [18:54] Geekster Sugarbeet: I think I need to impose on Damek & have him send the group a flowchart/drawing/ something of how this works ,cause I still can't get my head around it ;-D [18:54] Dinnie Devonshire: And I will send the small list of subjects that we can begin to modify if you like. [18:54] Damek Tretiak: yes, a diagram would help. [18:55] Swann Proost: i hae also made some modifications to the matrix, incorporating what dinnie contributed ... it is not quite all there yet, but will be soon [18:55] Swann Proost: it is on the whiteboard that damek set up [18:55] Rocky Vallejo: I guess we'd have to contact each collection manager and see whether they want to catalog their collection themselves or not? [18:56] Damek Tretiak: oh...i did mean to mention, that I'll provide a way to load up item lists directly to the website if needed. For example, if a collector puts everything in a csv list they can give that to the cataloger who then uploads it to the site in bulk. [18:56] Geekster Sugarbeet: abbey - thanks for getting us back on track. can we come to some agreement about what our next steps hould be? [18:56] Swann Proost: if a collection manager catalogs him/herself, do we want ot have it reviewed for consistency, etc.? [18:56] Rocky Vallejo: will we have time to do that.. reveiw? would be nice.. but.... [18:56] Dinnie Devonshire: Maybe the first one or two they do. [18:57] Rocky Vallejo: good suggestion Dinnie [18:57] Swann Proost: i'm still not sure how many objects we are talking about .. so it depends [18:57] Damek Tretiak: I would like to get the basic schema completed first...as that's what will define changes I make to slq for you. [18:57] Damek Tretiak: i.e. the idea of categories, tags, etc. [18:57] Geekster Sugarbeet: so far i have: 1. dinnies list of categories .. and? [18:58] Dinnie Devonshire: The list I have spoken of is the categories and sub-cats on your notecard [18:58] Damek Tretiak: I need that before I can begin to move that part forward [18:58] Dinnie Devonshire: You shall have it tomorrow [18:58] Damek Tretiak: excellent, thanks. :-) [18:58] Geekster Sugarbeet: maybe we should just set the goal of getting the categories set up? timeline? [18:58] Swann Proost: damek, on your schema you just sent us ... are you seeing the tag in a hierarchical relationship to the Higehr Level Catelogry and the Subcategoires? [18:58] Dinnie Devonshire: good question [18:59] Damek Tretiak: actually, i saw the tags outside of that scope...more free-form and in addition to the categories/sub-categories. [18:59] Swann Proost: ok [19:00] Damek Tretiak: the tags could exist in any category, but searching by category or sub-category would constrain what is returned even more [19:00] Dinnie Devonshire: Sounds workable to me [19:01] Geekster Sugarbeet: It looks like the "management team" should meet ASAP to hash these ideas out. Does anyone else have topics to bring up (briefly please!) before i close the meeting? [19:01] Dinnie Devonshire: Just thanks to Damek for thinking so quickly :) [19:01] Damek Tretiak blushes [19:01] Damek Tretiak: lol [19:01] Geekster Sugarbeet: deafening silence = we're done here! I'm sure i'll call another meeting quite soon to keep you all posted. [19:02] Rocky Vallejo: thanks, Geekster [19:02] Geekster Sugarbeet: Damek, Dinnie & Swann - please stay after class ;-D I'll see every one else later! [19:02] Rocky Vallejo: kept it in at an hour! [19:02] Dinnie Devonshire: :) [19:02] Damek Tretiak: thanks to everyone, it's starting to come together now [19:03] Dinnie Devonshire: Yes I think so [19:03] Swann Proost thinks oh-oh [19:03] Geekster Sugarbeet: bye everyone - thanks for coming! [19:03] Cindy Elkhart: bye [19:03] Dinnie Devonshire: Look at these two! [19:03] Herb Moorhen: bye all [19:03] Rocky Vallejo: damek.. we're competing again! [19:03] Swann Proost: don't you guys have a tip jar? [19:03] Abbey Zenith: bye all :) [19:03] Rocky Vallejo: LOL [19:03] Damek Tretiak: lol...sl is a very humbling place [19:03] Swann Proost: bye abbey [19:03] Rocky Vallejo: bye everybody [19:03] Cindy Elkhart: bye Abbey [19:04] Dinnie Devonshire: Bye those who leave! [19:04] Damek Tretiak: ok, I don't see any blackboards I have to write "I will not speak out of turn" on...so that's good. [19:05] Geekster Sugarbeet: yes, we'll i wish we had a blackboard! chat is useless to accomplish anything (at least for me - very frustrating!) [19:05] Damek Tretiak: it's difficult...I have a presentation board I'm working on that I'll bring next time. It's simple, but might be helpful as a collaboration tool. [19:05] Dinnie Devonshire: Cool. That will help. [19:06] Swann Proost: what about skype? [19:06] Swann Proost: these meetings are awkward [19:06] Geekster Sugarbeet: is there a way we can hash out the categories? will using the whiteboard space damek has set up be adequate? [19:06] Dinnie Devonshire: I will send the categories we have tomorrow and you wioll see how they cover just about everything. [19:06] Swann Proost: i was working with the whiteboard today .. i think it will be fine [19:07] Dinnie Devonshire: Then we can whittle them down or add categories that may be very "SL" [19:07] Geekster Sugarbeet: ok - can we try to set a timeline? i'd like to feel like we're getting *somewhere* [19:07] Damek Tretiak: the writboards should help collaboration, you can always go back to a previous version if needed [19:07] Dinnie Devonshire: And that's on your website? [19:07] Damek Tretiak: the project site, yes. [19:08] Dinnie Devonshire: You probably sent the URL earlier. I will fiond it. I could post the list there, then. [19:08] Damek Tretiak: each of you has rights to edit the writeboards. You can also add comments to the bottom of them. [19:08] Damek Tretiak: I can resend it to you :-) [19:08] Dinnie Devonshire: Yes please! I am in too many groups! [19:09] Geekster Sugarbeet: good, can we aim to get something done by April 1? [19:09] Damek Tretiak: i know the feeling [19:09] Dinnie Devonshire: Geekster I think so. [19:09] Swann Proost: depends what it is you want done, geekster [19:09] Geekster Sugarbeet: just look over the categories & set up the basic structure of main & subs. knowing we can add & edit as we go along.. [19:10] Damek Tretiak: Dinnie I just resent you a "welcome" emai from the project site [19:10] Dinnie Devonshire: that will definitely be done by then [19:10] Dinnie Devonshire: Thanks Damek [19:10] Swann Proost: ok. i am out of town for a few days, but i will schedule some time in [19:10] Damek Tretiak: for my own benefit, can I assume the basic structure I indicated in the notecard was accepted? [19:10] Swann Proost: i need to think about taht some damek ... [19:11] Swann Proost: the idea of tags is too amorphous for me .... [19:11] Damek Tretiak: before all the categories are input, I need to make a few changes to the actual db schema. [19:11] Geekster Sugarbeet: hmm.. not sure I *think* we'll need to look at Dinnies list & then your proposal. [19:11] Damek Tretiak: np [19:11] Swann Proost: as catalogers, i think we usually think in some very fixed structures [19:11] Geekster Sugarbeet: I have some ideas about other addiitonal fields, so... [19:11] Dinnie Devonshire: My list is simply the "values" that will populate Damek's categories and subcategories [19:11] Damek Tretiak: I think that's fine, the tags are definitely less structured [19:12] Swann Proost: but i think we may need some more structured fields [19:12] Swann Proost: such as title, author, location [19:12] Geekster Sugarbeet: oh - ok, i guess I did not really get that part dinnie. so we'll need to think of the whole structure. though values should give us some ideas... [19:12] Swann Proost: i see the tags as more optional [19:12] Damek Tretiak: oh...those already exist. [19:13] Geekster Sugarbeet: author? [19:13] Swann Proost: ok then .. i thought so, but then didn't read the card that way [19:13] Damek Tretiak: the title, author, description, etc. are in addition to the categories, etc. Or, are you thinking more along the lines of being able to drill down into those categories and look at, for example, authors who only belong to that category? [19:14] Rocky Vallejo is Offline [19:14] Swann Proost: no, i don't think most people search or use catalogs that way [19:14] Swann Proost: the way you have it set up will probably work fine [19:15] Damek Tretiak: ok, the biggest change, for slq, is to add the categories, sub-categories, and "main location" fields. [19:15] Damek Tretiak: the title, author, description, etc. are all existing fields that will continue to be avail. [19:16] Damek Tretiak: WE can always add additional fields, but the categories add another level of abstraction [19:16] Swann Proost: by 'main loction', do you mean where an item 'is' in SL? [19:16] Damek Tretiak: Right now, the items are only listed by their "box" location, which is just a specific SL location. [19:16] Geekster Sugarbeet: those fields for sure damek, but i'm not sure that we have the complete list of SLquery fields - i don't remember seeing author.. [19:16] Damek Tretiak: during our talk I heard mention of being able to search by an alternative lcoation [19:17] Damek Tretiak: such as...Mystery Manor, SciFi Library, etc. [19:17] Swann Proost: yes [19:17] Swann Proost: i just wanted to clarify that [19:17] Geekster Sugarbeet: yes [19:17] Damek Tretiak: Regions are searchable now, but specific "parcel" or library searches are not [19:17] Damek Tretiak: np, sounds like I heard correctly then. :-) [19:18] Damek Tretiak: yes, author was an addition, to distinguish the owner of the item from the author. [19:18] Swann Proost: i think there is a writebaord page with all the categories or fiels, sin't there? [19:18] Swann Proost: *fields [19:19] Damek Tretiak: yes, the current slquery fields are on the project site for you [19:19] Swann Proost: we should look at that then very carefully [19:19] Damek Tretiak: I will add my little notecard from tonight on there and then update it with the existing fields we have [19:19] Geekster Sugarbeet: ok - let's work on getting categories set up. we'll be able to continue the conversation on the writeboard. i've got to go. y'all can keep on with the conversation, just keep me posted! [19:19] Swann Proost: i have dishes to do .... [19:20] Dinnie Devonshire: I have to go too. I am doing an SL intro tomorrow morning and dont want to be inworld all night! [19:20] Swann Proost: but i do want to ask if any of those wrieboards can be made more public, to share with a wider audience? [19:21] Damek Tretiak: Yes, they can. THere is a "Share URL" at the top of each whiteboard you can use to send to other people. [19:21] Swann Proost: ok [19:21] Damek Tretiak: I need to look at whether or not these "others" can share in the editing though. [19:21] Swann Proost: i'm not ready yet, but i can see that down the road [19:21] Swann Proost: i'd want to control editing if we can [19:21] Damek Tretiak: I believe editing is controleld by the project members, but need to verify that. [19:22] Swann Proost: k [19:22] Swann Proost: ty [19:22] Dinnie Devonshire: Good meeting folks. Thanks Geekster for getting us through it! [19:22] Geekster Sugarbeet: thanks dinnie - i'm bloodied, but still standing! [19:22] Swann Proost: heh [19:22] Damek Tretiak: yes, good meeting. I think next time, we'll have more concrete items to show. [19:22] Dinnie Devonshire: Nah, its just schema! [19:23] Dinnie Devonshire: Sorry that was for Geek not Damek! :) [19:23] Geekster Sugarbeet: thanks alot guys. i'll be in touch (nagging -some might call it!) tomorrow [19:23] Dinnie Devonshire: Lag happens! [19:23] Damek Tretiak: lol...yes, more so these days...grrr. [19:23] Dinnie Devonshire: OK. Bye now everyone. [19:23] Swann Proost: bye all [19:23] Damek Tretiak: swann, to answer your question. Editing is controlled at the project level. [19:23] Geekster Sugarbeet: bye! [19:24] Dinnie Devonshire is Offline [19:24] Swann Proost: i need to sit here and commune for a bit [19:24] Damek Tretiak: if need be, I can add an additionl group to the project site for readers only. [19:24] Swann Proost: that might be useful down the road [19:24] Geekster Sugarbeet: readers only would probably work