[18:09] Geekster Sugarbeet: ok - meeting called to order - if i may :-) [18:09] Geekster Sugarbeet: did everyone do their homework? [18:09] Swann Proost: absolutely [18:10] Dinnie Devonshire: In a lackadasical sort of way :( [18:10] Geekster Sugarbeet: swann - i know *you* did ; [18:10] JJ Drinkwater: Well, no, of course not [18:10] Swann Proost: i took notes and wrote an essay on it [18:10] Dinnie Devonshire: I've been doing laundry all day. Cant remember what it was :) [18:10] JJ Drinkwater: But i'm mostly here to listen, so.....er, so you guys can give me The Look anyway... [18:11] Dinnie Devonshire gives JJ The Look [18:11] Geekster Sugarbeet: well - i was hoping not to monopolize the conversation - but it looks like swann has things covered, so.. swann? [18:11] JJ Drinkwater quails [18:11] JJ Drinkwater: . [18:11] Swann Proost: i lied [18:11] Abbey Zenith wants a look to give [18:11] Swann Proost: my computer ate my homework [18:11] Geekster Sugarbeet: figures [18:11] Swann Proost: but i did look at the stuff [18:11] Swann Proost: i come with a ready made opinion [18:11] Dinnie Devonshire: which is? [18:12] Swann Proost: DDC [18:12] Geekster Sugarbeet: well - can we decide which list of subject terms? yr vote swann? [18:12] Geekster Sugarbeet: ok - i vote ddc or udc [18:12] Swann Proost: i think it is accessible, logical, comprehensive [18:12] Dinnie Devonshire: You mean the DDC headings, yes? [18:12] Swann Proost: yes, by and large ... there is another issue though [18:13] Swann Proost: and that is the class numbers ... the headings are only explanations for the enumeration .... [18:13] Swann Proost: and the classes don't work without the numbers .... [18:13] Swann Proost: otherwise, we might as well just use subject headings [18:13] Dinnie Devonshire: And the numbers will allow Damek to do flips for translation to other languages. [18:13] Dinnie Devonshire: Thats the nice thing about DDC numbers. [18:13] Swann Proost: yes, very good [18:14] Swann Proost: it will allow collaction and browsing [18:14] Swann Proost: collocation [18:14] Geekster Sugarbeet: don't see why we cant keep the numbers "hidden" [18:14] Dinnie Devonshire: We can, we are just looking at botht he top visible layer and the underpinnings together. [18:14] Swann Proost: you can hide them until you want to browse up and down the hierarchy [18:14] Dinnie Devonshire: It has to hang together sinsibly. [18:14] Dinnie Devonshire: sensibly [18:14] Dinnie Devonshire: or whatever :) [18:14] Swann Proost: makes sense [18:15] Dinnie Devonshire: Also, I thought that, with Dewey, the person doing the cataloguing has an option. [18:15] Geekster Sugarbeet: nice in theory - but right now, no browse capability - right? [18:15] Swann Proost: why no browsing? [18:15] Swann Proost: is that a limitation? [18:15] Geekster Sugarbeet: even if/when, would we need to see the numbers? [18:16] Dinnie Devonshire: They can be general, or more specific, and the cataloguing will still make sense. We can maybe do searching on narrower and then broader, again using the numbers underneath. [18:16] Swann Proost: you can ignore them if damek can provide some other means of navigation [18:16] Swann Proost: you want to be able to drill down and scan [18:16] Dinnie Devonshire: I donth think the numbers need to be seen if more than one line of subject heading can be vioewed. [18:16] Dinnie Devonshire: viewed. [18:17] Geekster Sugarbeet: right - damek said he has a bunch of stuff to show/tell - but has been busy in RL [18:17] Geekster Sugarbeet: and may/may not be here tonight [18:17] Dinnie Devonshire: Well, I can agree with Swann on DDC, if that gives us the way forward. [18:17] Swann Proost: it would be nice if you could be presented a list of the basic ten numbers, select one, see the next list etc [18:17] Swann Proost: 'number' meaning heading [18:17] Dinnie Devonshire: Yes [18:18] Dinnie Devonshire: Thats why I sent the link to the Dewey listing. It was quite clean. [18:18] Swann Proost: yes, that was good [18:18] Geekster Sugarbeet: yes - i think to the 10's would work - though i don't like the 800's (lit) - 10's will be to broad imho [18:19] Swann Proost: there are still problems with DDC, but there is with all of them [18:19] Geekster Sugarbeet: agreed [18:19] JJ Drinkwater nods [18:19] Dinnie Devonshire: I think, though, that the folks doing the cataloguing want their things to be discovered. They will find they will have better results if they code a bit more specifically. [18:20] Dinnie Devonshire: So, I believe that in a way the depth of treatment will be self-regulating. [18:20] Swann Proost: another good thing is that many resources will have cognates in OCLC. one can cheat if one wants to [18:20] Dinnie Devonshire: Yes, that's true and can be a selling point. [18:20] Geekster Sugarbeet: cheating is good :-) - in this instance! [18:21] JJ Drinkwater: In-WorldCat [18:21] Swann Proost: forget i said that. 'inspired' is a better term [18:21] Geekster Sugarbeet: OK - can we have a vote? anyone wholeheartedly AGAINST ddc - speak up now! [18:22] Swann Proost: abbey ... do you have an opinion on this? [18:22] Abbey Zenith: No, I'm not going to be doing the cataloging, make it as easy on the catalogers as possible, while still giving access to users. [18:23] Swann Proost: ok thanks [18:23] Abbey Zenith: if it is too difficult volunteers will be hard to come by [18:23] Swann Proost: yep [18:24] Dinnie Devonshire: Which is why they can choose to be very broad if they want and it will still at least hget the resource into the group with which it belongs. [18:25] Geekster Sugarbeet: okey dokey - ddc it is - thanks esp. to swann and dinnie for enlightening & aggravating(only sometimes!) discussion/e-mail [18:25] Dinnie Devonshire: :) [18:25] Swann Proost: heh [18:25] Dinnie Devonshire: I can be frightfully aggravating! [18:25] Rocky Vallejo: when you say "they" Dinnie do you mean the people who will catalog their own collections or the catalogers who will volunteer to go out and do collections arond the islands? [18:26] Rocky Vallejo: will we, the catalogers, be asked to maintain some kind of uniformity i npresentation? [18:26] Rocky Vallejo: in what we do? [18:26] Dinnie Devonshire: Both, Rocky. [18:26] Swann Proost: i think the uniformity is desirable, but it will have to be self governing to a large extent [18:26] Dinnie Devonshire: The uniformity will come from the classification. You can't go too wrong, starting with the broadest. It then is simple to work to a more specific code if one wants. [18:27] Swann Proost: if we provide guidelines, we would trust it will be implemented more or less in step [18:27] Dinnie Devonshire: I will send the link to the Dewey outline to everyone so you can see the simplicity of it. [18:28] Dinnie Devonshire: Also, we can use those Dewey official publications. OCLC copyright extends to the use of the name and such, but using the classification itself for library work is permitted. [18:28] Dinnie Devonshire: The schedule we would us is entirely online. We would not need to go beyond it, I don't think. [18:28] Rocky Vallejo: OK [18:29] Geekster Sugarbeet: the SL "catalog" record wil be a mix of uniform/non-uniform fields. [18:29] Dinnie Devonshire: Except in the case of folks grabbing pre-assigned longer Dewey numbers from some other source. [18:29] Geekster Sugarbeet: I think the vision right now is to have the DDC terms "selected" by the cataloger from a drop-down list (or other mechanism) [18:29] Dinnie Devonshire: Yes, it will be Geekster, but the Dewey field will contain only Dewey headings/numbers. [18:30] Dinnie Devonshire: Yes, dropdowns might be possible. Damek wil have to answer that, though. [18:30] Geekster Sugarbeet: right dinnie - but there will be other fields (keyword / subject, etc.) that will be non-uniform [18:30] Rocky Vallejo: So we'll be using the Dewey headings that traditionally appear in vol. 4 of the book set? [18:31] Rocky Vallejo: sorry... been working on a real life project and didnt' do my homework either [18:31] Rocky Vallejo: sigh [18:31] Dinnie Devonshire: Yes, I think that's what the summary document reproduces. Let me find the link for you all. one sec. [18:32] Dinnie Devonshire: http://www.oclc.org/dewey/resources/summaries/ [18:32] Swann Proost: i think at this point we are only looking at 1000 class headings, right? [18:32] Rocky Vallejo: thanks [18:32] Swann Proost: no deeper into the scheme? [18:33] Swann Proost: wait .. 100! [18:33] Dinnie Devonshire: I dont think deeped will be needed, unless we begin to import whole libraries of Dickens or something :) [18:33] Swann Proost: i'm a cataloger, not a mathematician [18:33] Geekster Sugarbeet: swann - don't do that! yeesh! [18:33] Swann Proost: heh [18:33] Geekster Sugarbeet: I think 100 should be enough without being too overwhelming. [18:34] Swann Proost: at least it will get us started. if the number of objects balloon, we have a ready made way to extend it [18:34] Dinnie Devonshire: The other thing about Dewey is that it has official translations, so it is standardized. [18:34] Geekster Sugarbeet: also, remeber that we will still have keyword tags as well as controlled subject headings (possibly) [18:35] Dinnie Devonshire: The Dewey will be the controlled headings, I think. You will not need others, probably. [18:35] Swann Proost: one thing i have been wondering about is if these headings will be linked .... so if we change a term, it will automatically ripple throughout all records with that term [18:35] Geekster Sugarbeet: i'm betting it could be done, but only damek can answer. [18:35] Dinnie Devonshire: Yes, it would work like that, I'm sure [18:36] LibMon 2.0: touch for web dialog [18:36] Swann Proost: damek, if you are reading these minutes, this one is for you [18:36] Geekster Sugarbeet: ok - let's move on to the next agenda item - which i've conveniently forgotten! [18:37] Swann Proost: the religious records [18:37] Swann Proost: i think [18:38] LibMon 2.0 Employment: touch for web dialog [18:38] Geekster Sugarbeet: yep- thanks. I re-did the religious resouces using a "notecard" level rather than "link" level framework [18:38] Geekster Sugarbeet: did anyone take a look? [18:38] Swann Proost: yes [18:39] Dinnie Devonshire: nope. no time :( [18:39] Swann Proost: what do you mean by a notecard level rather than a link level? [18:39] Rocky Vallejo sinks down in chair hoping nobdy will notice him [18:39] Geekster Sugarbeet: well- I'm trying to get at the WHAT as set up in Swann's matrix. [18:41] Geekster Sugarbeet: it seems as if the idea is to catalog at a larger granular level - not individual grains of sand (so to speak) [18:41] Geekster Sugarbeet: you'll have to forgive me, my brain is totally fried today... [18:41] Swann Proost: so we wouldn't catalog a book, but a collection? [18:42] Rocky Vallejo: or a web site? [18:42] Geekster Sugarbeet: i don't know - that's what i'm asking [18:42] Dinnie Devonshire: I think it depends. [18:42] Swann Proost: i think to be useful, we have to get to the sand [18:42] Rocky Vallejo: If I'm cataloging my own collection I'm going to pull out the grains of sand [18:42] Rocky Vallejo: I put that collection together and I want to provide good access to it [18:42] Dinnie Devonshire: If the collection will be enough to let folks zero in on what they want, then that may be all that's needed. [18:43] Dinnie Devonshire: For instance, a Charles Dickens collection will attract most people who are interested in anything about or by Dickens. [18:43] Dinnie Devonshire: You may not need to ctaalogue individual works that may appear there. [18:43] Geekster Sugarbeet: I think it's going to depend on who's doing the cataloging- if it's the developer of the collection [18:44] Dinnie Devonshire: However, if a work by Dickens shows up in some other place, e.g. in a sociial science exhibit, then you may want to catalogue that individually. [18:44] Geekster Sugarbeet: he/she may be willing to catalog each grain of sand - but if it's a volunteer, [18:44] Rocky Vallejo: but I would want to include the individual links to coutnry information in the world geography collection rather than just putting up seven records for the different continents [18:45] Dinnie Devonshire: Yes, like I said, it depends o what it is, and what the context is, and what the audience might be. [18:45] Rocky Vallejo: the individual collections within Georgraphy are groups by continent [18:46] Geekster Sugarbeet: dinnie - i agree that it depends, but if we can't give some frameworkfor what should/should not be cataloged, we run the risk of having a useless google-cat [18:47] Swann Proost: it is hard to speak in the abstract on this. we might have to address the question as we go along [18:47] Dinnie Devonshire: I still think that if the folks who "own" the resources want them found, they will give them some sort of catalogue treatmnent so they show up in the search tool. [18:47] Geekster Sugarbeet: agreed, which is why i did the religious resources exercise... [18:47] Swann Proost: for most purposes, i think specificity is good. but i can conceive of things where we might just be dumping a bunch of things into a bucket [18:47] Geekster Sugarbeet: personally, i fail to see the utility of cataloging a wikipedia link (sorry abbey - no offense i hope!) [18:48] Trouble Welles shouts: HOW DO I GIVE THIS THING AWAY ??!! [18:48] Rocky Vallejo: actually I was the person who put together the resources for the religion collection... most of them [18:48] Rocky Vallejo: and my library has about 1,000 Wikipedia records in our online catalog [18:49] Abbey Zenith: yes, Rocky did most of the resources, no offense...Wiki is easy enough for most to find, but it a good starting point for information. [18:49] Geekster Sugarbeet: oops - sorry rocky! not that the resources aren't good - it's just, should we be catalogining links that are findable via , say, google? [18:49] Abbey Zenith: all are findable via google if you look long enough ;) [18:49] Dinnie Devonshire: I understood that we were looking at cataloguing in-world stuff first and foremost. [18:49] Dinnie Devonshire: The web has its own finding routines. [18:50] Rocky Vallejo: wikipedia links usually are at the top of google searches.. but we're not here to debate Wikipedia [18:50] Abbey Zenith: our web resources are to give people subject guides of a sort. [18:51] Dinnie Devonshire: Yes, but I would assume that (to use Dickens again) if I wants Dickens stuff I will find Dickens stuff in SL and then there I will, of course, find there are links to the web. [18:51] Dinnie Devonshire: We don't really need to catalogue the web stuff, just the SL stuff. [18:52] Abbey Zenith: ok with the web stuff I suppose that cataloging to a notecard level would be enough, if we help people fine the "subject guide" of a notecard with resources.... [18:52] Abbey Zenith: find [18:52] Dinnie Devonshire: Exactly, Abbey. [18:52] Swann Proost: i would expect that if someone created a bibliography here of Web resources on Dickens, we would catalog the bibliography/notecard, but not each Web site that is referenced [18:53] Dinnie Devonshire: Yes. [18:53] LibMon 2.0 Employment: touch for web dialog [18:53] Rocky Vallejo: The notecards for the World Geography collections.... there are seven of them. So we'd just catalog those seven notecards? [18:53] Swann Proost: what is on teh notecards? [18:53] Dinnie Devonshire: Yes, I think so. [18:53] Rocky Vallejo: Asia, Europe, etc [18:53] Rocky Vallejo: links to all the different coutnries [18:53] Abbey Zenith: well that one is a bit more difficult [18:53] Rocky Vallejo: web sites [18:54] Rocky Vallejo: within those continents [18:54] Dinnie Devonshire: Are they all concerned specifically with geography of those areas? [18:54] Abbey Zenith: they each have information on many subjects within the continents [18:54] Swann Proost: in that case, yes .. i would catalog the seven. otherwise, we start doing what is really analytical cataloging that i don't think we can sustain [18:54] Rocky Vallejo: geography, history, culture, etc [18:54] Dinnie Devonshire: or are they really general? [18:54] Rocky Vallejo: of each country [18:54] Dinnie Devonshire: OK. [18:54] Geekster Sugarbeet: this is what i was talking about re: granularity.. [18:54] Rocky Vallejo: individual country links [18:55] Dinnie Devonshire: I'd say to the country level only. The rest of the things are not in SL, they are on the web. [18:55] Rocky Vallejo: yes, Geekster [18:55] Swann Proost: that's how i see it, dinnie [18:55] Rocky Vallejo: and if we leave things up to collection managers we're going to get grain counters and beach bums... so to speak [18:55] Abbey Zenith: So on one continent notecard, you'd catalog it to the country level? [18:56] Dinnie Devonshire: Remember, the "finder" of the resource in SLQuery will see that it is about, say, Australia, but they wioll also see the location ... which may be an SL library or it may be an SL recreational beach area. That is what will give a lot of distinction. [18:56] JJ Drinkwater tries to decide whether to be a grain counter of a beach bum [18:56] Rocky Vallejo: As the collection manager of World Geography I'm going to look at the guidelines and decide what I want to do [18:56] Dinnie Devonshire wants to find that Australian beach! [18:57] Rocky Vallejo: I just want to make sure that that's oK and that my records will all be included [18:57] Dinnie Devonshire: Yes, and as the collections manager I think you have that right. [18:57] Swann Proost: if you divided the country up with different cards for economy, history, language, etc., i could see each one with its own record [18:58] Geekster Sugarbeet: right - notecard level! [18:58] Rocky Vallejo: If you're going to limit people to notecard level then you need to tell them that [18:59] Geekster Sugarbeet: i'm not saying we have to - but maybe it's useful to think of the notecard as the smallest container we'll catalog? [18:59] Dinnie Devonshire: There is another aspect, though. The object in question has a notecard that is a thing we want to catalogue. Thats good and we do that. [18:59] Rocky Vallejo: LOL.... and then you'll come up against some stubborn grain counter like me [18:59] Swann Proost: if we are talking about notecards, yes .... [18:59] Rocky Vallejo: I guess we can suggest? [18:59] Rocky Vallejo: and leave it at that? [19:00] Dinnie Devonshire: But, the notecard may be served out by a large map of Australia. You will also want to catalogue that mpa in SL as a map of Australia, as an object standing on its own. [19:00] Swann Proost: but maybe we might catalog collections of notecards as well, if they have some internal system of linkages [19:00] Dinnie Devonshire: Yes, that too, Swann. [19:01] Swann Proost: i need to take a look at your geography collection, rocky. i want to be certain i am understanding what it is [19:01] Rocky Vallejo: please do, Swann... It's still a work in progress... about 4-5 volunteers working on it... 8th and 9th floors of new building [19:02] Geekster Sugarbeet: right - i guess it comes back (for me) to the concept of cataloging SL resources (things that exist in SL & nowhere else) [19:02] Damek Tretiak is Online [19:03] Geekster Sugarbeet: which would be notecards, sl books, sl audiobooks, sl maps, etc.. etc.. but not websites! [19:03] Dinnie Devonshire: For the Jewish genealogy exhibit I just got up: I would catalogue the exhibit itself ... Jewish genealogy ... and I would make sure it was noted as for beginners. I wouold not treat every image and notecard in it, but only selected ... such as the maps of migrations of people. [19:03] Swann Proost: i think that is a good principle, geekster. every effort to catalog the internet or even a portion thereof falters [19:03] Rocky Vallejo: sigh... are you going to tell the collection managers this, Geekster? [19:03] Rocky Vallejo: no web sites [19:04] Dinnie Devonshire: Rocky, why do you want to catalogue websites in both your RL cataloge and in an SL catalogue? [19:04] Damek Tretiak: Script run-time error [19:04] Damek Tretiak: Stack-Heap Collision [19:04] Geekster Sugarbeet: well- web sites can be included on notecards, as a list of resources, etc.. but.. sorry! [19:04] Rocky Vallejo: Dont' you catalog web sites in your RL catalog, Dinnie? [19:05] Dinnie Devonshire: No, in fact, we don't. [19:05] Dinnie Devonshire: Not yet, anyway. [19:05] Rocky Vallejo: we have about 30,000 web documents, sites, etc [19:05] Swann Proost: we catalog selected websites, but it is for a different purpose [19:05] Swann Proost: i also have a whole department of catalogers working 8 hours every day [19:06] Geekster Sugarbeet: hi damek- thanks for coming by! [19:06] Rocky Vallejo: To me Info Island is like a public library... serving people who have not used a RL library in years... many of them at least [19:06] Damek Tretiak: apologies for not being able to make it earlier [19:06] Rocky Vallejo: I want to provide access as simple and direct as possible [19:06] Swann Proost: we would have bored you to death [19:06] Damek Tretiak: lol, that can't be true [19:06] Dinnie Devonshire: Why not just port your catalogue into SL and do the lookups in your RL catalogue then? It seems you want to make those resources available to an audience, so why go to double work? [19:06] Geekster Sugarbeet: hey - he missed the excitement of us actually making a decision! [19:07] Rocky Vallejo: woops [19:07] Rocky Vallejo: sorry Geekster [19:07] Swann Proost: we have access to worldcat.org, right? [19:07] Damek Tretiak: decisions are good. :-) [19:07] Swann Proost: that is the portal [19:07] Damek Tretiak: Nice shirt Dinnie :-) [19:07] Geekster Sugarbeet: dinnie - good point! [19:07] Dinnie Devonshire: :) [19:07] Geekster Sugarbeet: dinnie - didn't i tell you he'd like it?! [19:08] Dinnie Devonshire: :) [19:08] Dinnie Devonshire: :) [19:08] Dinnie Devonshire: :) [19:08] Rocky Vallejo: woops... dog wants outside... brb [19:08] Damek Tretiak: lol [19:08] Dinnie Devonshire: :) to that, too! [19:09] Damek Tretiak: what were the decisions that were made? [19:09] Dinnie Devonshire: I didnt have a shirt with 42 on it, in honour of the day. [19:09] Damek Tretiak: :-) [19:09] Dinnie Devonshire: (that was not the decision.) [19:09] Geekster Sugarbeet: only one (alas) - we'll be going with DDC (dewey decimal class) to the '10's (tell you later) for our controlled subject terms [19:10] Dinnie Devonshire: I thought to the 100s? [19:10] Damek Tretiak: sorry...lag. [19:11] Geekster Sugarbeet: 100's would be too broad - to the 10's will give us approx 100 subject headings [19:11] Damek Tretiak: The ddc as was described in the last couple of document I saw? [19:11] Dinnie Devonshire: Oh sorry, my head was on backwards! [19:11] Swann Proost: to be clear: 100, 110, 120, 130, etc. ... right? [19:12] Geekster Sugarbeet: yes [19:12] Damek Tretiak: I think 100 subject headings is plenty. Anything more and I think it would border on being too much, especially for novices. [19:13] Geekster Sugarbeet: damek - the ddc list should be in swann's classification exercise i posted in googledocs [19:13] Geekster Sugarbeet: i think i added a sheet with the ddc just to the 10's [19:13] Damek Tretiak: Ok, great. I think I did see that. I should be able to get back to the newer slq server work this week. So, it's good timing. [19:14] Dinnie Devonshire: And the Dewey will have transaltions, so that work would be essentially done for us. [19:14] Dinnie Devonshire: translations. [19:14] Geekster Sugarbeet: a question did come up - can we limit the data entered in that field to just the 100 "valid" subjects? [19:14] Damek Tretiak: I've started a localization table fro that purpose. :-) [19:15] Geekster Sugarbeet: and, can we have a dropdown/picklist capability so the cataloger does not have to look up valid headings elesewhere? [19:15] Dinnie Devonshire: It would ideally be two-tiered, Damek. [19:15] Damek Tretiak: can you explain the two-tier a little more, so I can make sure I understand? [19:16] Dinnie Devonshire: The catalogure picked 20 (or the heading for 20), and then the choices for 200, 210, 220,etc. appear. [19:16] Rocky Vallejo is Offline [19:16] Damek Tretiak: Oh, yes. That can be done. [19:16] Dinnie Devonshire: Rather than having all the heading strung out. [19:16] Geekster Sugarbeet: \me gives damek a big smooch [19:16] Damek Tretiak: On the web it's not going to be a problem, doing that in SL is more of an issue. [19:17] Damek Tretiak: But, I'm really starting to shy away from data input inside SL. It's just not ready yet. [19:17] Dinnie Devonshire: That will make a difference in how we do this, then. [19:17] Geekster Sugarbeet: oh - you get another smooch from me! i'm not liking the infoboxes much (sorry ;-( [19:18] Damek Tretiak: I'd love to keep more inside, but I'm not sure yet how to make it stable enough. [19:18] Dinnie Devonshire: So, if the description is done and then held on the web, how do we port it into active SL use? [19:18] Damek Tretiak: lol, they were definitely a work in progress. [19:19] Damek Tretiak: I still think there needs to be an in-world component, to ensure the items are still active and also provide some sense of placement. [19:19] Damek Tretiak: However, the infoboxes as they are are a bit clunky. [19:19] Dinnie Devonshire: Yes, I was thinking more of the problem of lag if we have to put calls back to the web all the time. [19:20] Damek Tretiak: Oh, well the whole system is really dependant on the web servers and the databases out there. [19:20] Damek Tretiak: To do an in-world database would be great, but not really a stable solution, especially since the SL servers are taxed more than my thir-dparty ones are. [19:21] Dinnie Devonshire: OK, so we should all pray for the developer of the "one big browser" ... :)? [19:21] Geekster Sugarbeet: yikes! i've been a horrible leader - look at the time - sorry! [19:21] Damek Tretiak: The http calls out, seem to work fine. [19:22] Dinnie Devonshire: Its Rocky coming in that seems to be a problem :) [19:22] JJ Drinkwater: . [19:22] JJ Drinkwater: Rocky's been rutheed! [19:22] Damek Tretiak: yes, a browser solution would be awesome! [19:22] Damek Tretiak: Xmlrpc calls back in to SL are another issue. I've seen them degrade horribly over the past few months. [19:22] JJ Drinkwater: ' [19:22] Rocky Vallejo: sorry.. major crash... and yes... I'm Ruth now [19:22] Rocky Vallejo: LOL [19:22] Damek Tretiak: I was thinking of tweaking the web-tab version of SLQ for this project as well though. [19:22] Geekster Sugarbeet: i think that we should consult some more with the coll. dev. librarians regarding the granularity of the WHAT - does that seem reasonable - or foolhardy? [19:22] Damek Tretiak: take a look at my profile for an example...go to the web tab [19:23] Dinnie Devonshire: OK, will do. And yes, we should speak more to collection folks. [19:24] Geekster Sugarbeet: abbey - what would be our best way to do this? a meeting? garner feedback some other way? [19:24] Abbey Zenith: I've been thinking of us having a group meeting... [19:24] Abbey Zenith: Rocky? [19:24] Rocky Vallejo: yep... it's time [19:24] Abbey Zenith: We have several people who do collections and Rocky has several that work under him. [19:25] Swann Proost: if we are going to have a meeting, it might be good if we could have some examples cataloged ... it might save a lot of explaining [19:25] Rocky Vallejo: a small cadre of kansans [19:25] Dinnie Devonshire: It would be useful to discuss. I have a feeling that some things may need/have to have a deeper treatment that to the 10s [19:25] Abbey Zenith: yes, examples would be nice [19:25] Rocky Vallejo: should we offer to broaden this to include libraries that have collections in Cy1 and Cy2? [19:26] Rocky Vallejo: or leave them out for now? [19:26] Abbey Zenith: my inclination is to not include them at the moment. [19:26] Rocky Vallejo: k [19:26] Geekster Sugarbeet: well - we have abbeys list, i've done the rel. resources & we've go a bunch of stuf from JJ, so there's plenty to work with [19:26] Geekster Sugarbeet: got [19:26] Damek Tretiak: who are cy1 and cy2? it's my non-librarian ignorance coming out. :-) [19:26] Rocky Vallejo: hmmm.... what about island with special collections like Rachelville? [19:27] Rocky Vallejo: sorry Damek [19:27] Abbey Zenith: Cybrary 1 & 2 [19:27] Rocky Vallejo: Cybrary City and Cybrary City II [19:27] Damek Tretiak: np, i love learning about it [19:27] Abbey Zenith: Sure, Rocky we can include Rachelville. [19:27] Damek Tretiak: oh! should have known that. [19:27] Dinnie Devonshire: And we should also think about Caledon as a resource. There are collections there, are there not? [19:28] JJ Drinkwater: There are, yep [19:28] Abbey Zenith: yes [19:28] Rocky Vallejo: any others? [19:28] Damek Tretiak: I will build in the ability to see special collections as well, i.e. assign the resources to a specific group for instance if necessary [19:28] Rocky Vallejo: branches? [19:28] JJ Drinkwater: Thotica went poof [19:28] JJ Drinkwater: Abbey, what about Morrocco? [19:28] Abbey Zenith: still not started setting up resources [19:29] Damek Tretiak: that's in interesting question actually, we spoke about "locations" before as one level of categorization. How deep does the "location/collection" assignment need to go? [19:30] Geekster Sugarbeet: ok - so abbey, you'll keep us in mind when you convene the coll. dev. lib. meeting? in the meantime, we'll catalog some examples (swann - you volunteered? :-) [19:30] Abbey Zenith: Ok will do :) [19:30] Swann Proost: sure [19:31] Abbey Zenith: actually let's just come up with a time between us Geekster... [19:31] Abbey Zenith: we'll look at the calendar and pick something in a couple of weeks? [19:31] Geekster Sugarbeet: damek- take a look at my religious resources example - i think there i cataloged to the "peace park" on "info island" level [19:32] Swann Proost: how do we go about providing catalog examples? Do we just list out the fields, or actually input into the slquery? [19:32] Geekster Sugarbeet: abbey- sounds good - we can hash out via e-mail [19:33] Geekster Sugarbeet: swann- i'd just list out the fields, but we could add it to slquery (but not all the fields 'cause some aren't set up yet) to see how it works [19:33] Swann Proost: ok, if more than one person is doing this, maybe we have a template to work from? [19:34] Dinnie Devonshire: A template would be nice. [19:34] Geekster Sugarbeet: swann- hey, go nuts! [19:34] Abbey Zenith: Sorry folks, I need to go :) Geekster, will be in touch through email... [19:34] Damek Tretiak: bye abbey :-) [19:34] Geekster Sugarbeet: thanks abbey - we'll be wrapping up here soon (i hope!) [19:34] Rocky Vallejo: need to go too [19:34] Dinnie Devonshire: Abbey did you want to scoot down to Cy2 or no time now? [19:34] Rocky Vallejo: I have a paper I'm working on and a dealine [19:35] Swann Proost: if i can reconstruct the fileds we have in mind, sure [19:35] Rocky Vallejo: gotta get moving on it [19:35] Rocky Vallejo: sorry [19:35] Geekster Sugarbeet: swann- why don't you come up with sometheing & whiteboard it - dinnie & i can then tear it apart ;-) [19:35] Rocky Vallejo: night all [19:36] Geekster Sugarbeet: bye rocky! [19:36] Dinnie Devonshire: Yeah, I am really good at that :) [19:36] Swann Proost: bye rocky [19:36] Damek Tretiak: lol [19:36] Swann Proost: ok, i have no pride ... i'll let you rip into me [19:37] Geekster Sugarbeet: ok - i think i'll officially adjourn the meeting. [19:37] Swann Proost: second [19:37] Dinnie Devonshire: OK. See you all again soon. [19:37] Damek Tretiak: bye everyone [19:37] Geekster Sugarbeet: bye all! [19:38] Dinnie Devonshire: Bye everyone! [19:38] Swann Proost: bye