January 20, 2011
NCIP Standing Committee
January 20, 2011 – Conference Call
Present
Sue Boettcher – 3M
Susan Campbell – College Center for Library Automation
Rob Walsh – EnvisionWare (Maintenance Agency)
Mike Dicus – Ex Libris (Incoming Chair)
Eric Leckbee – Innovative Interfaces
John Bodfish – OCLC
Rob Gray – Pilot Consulting representing Polaris Library Systems
Dhaval Kotecha – RapidRadio
Thalia Dixson – The Library Corporation
Regrets
Mary Jackson – Auto-Graphics
Kevin Stewart – Relais International
Karen Wetzel - NISO
Agenda
I. Introduce NCIP SC Chair – Mike Dicus
Walsh introduced Dicus as the new chairperson for the NCIP Standing Committee. Walsh indicated that Dicus must be formally approved by the Discovery To Delivery (D2D) Topic Committee, and that an item has been added to the agenda for the next D2D conference call scheduled for January 28, 2011.
II. Progress review on NCIP 2.01 Revision
Walsh indicated that NISO has nearly completed its final edits on the NCIP 2.01 revisions. The editor posed a number of questions and comments, and Walsh was able to address all but one. He asked the group whether anyone objects to reordering Table 1 in Section 5.2 of Part 1 to be consistent with the ordering of the elements as they are presented in Section 5.4 rather than in alphabetical order as they are now. No objections were raised. Walsh agreed to communicate with the editor so that the edits can be completed and the revised standard can be posted.
III. Review past action items and priorities
a. Documentation
i. Is NCIP Restful?
The group agreed that the primary motivation for this documentation was no longer relevant and no further work needed to be done with this item.
ii. NCIP Statement Regarding Versions
Walsh indicated that a statement regarding versions was added to the 2.01 revisions. This item, therefore, should be considered complete.
iii. NCIP for Dummies (Getting Started with NCIP)
Bodfish indicated that there may have been an early draft of this document, but its current status is unknown. The group agreed that there remains a need for this document.
iv. Core Messages Explained
Walsh reported that a draft of this document was discussed at the September 2010 meeting, but all of the revisions were made on paper and may have been misplaced. Dicus said that he might have an electronic copy of the original draft and that he would look for it. [Editor’s Note: Dicus was able to locate the original draft. Walsh will look to see if he can find an electronic copy with the various edits from the in-person review.]
b. On-line Projects
i. Implementer Registry
Campbell reported that there are 4 US implementers and 2 non-US implementers listed in the registry. She added that it is being used. She said that a minor design flaw has been identified. The system does not properly handle having two registered users for the same vendor. The flaw is not causing problems at the moment, but if the system is revised in the future, the flaw should be addressed. Campbell agreed to speak with Wetzel about having NISO assume the on-going costs associated with hosting the system.
ii. NCIP Implementers Forum
Kotecha reported that the site was up and available. Walsh loaded the site and reported that it has had recent use. However, much of the content is spam (some of which is written in Russian). Gray agreed to talk with John Barr about cleaning up the spam, and Walsh suggested that we should revisit the issue of vetting subscribers to prevent spam.
c. Other
i. Social gathering at ALA Annual
The group has hosted social gatherings at the last two ALA Annual conferences. The first was not well attended, but the second was seen as successful. The group agreed that it should plan to host another gathering at this year’s ALA Annual meeting in New Orleans. Dicus agreed to begin looking for a time in the program.
IV. Discuss logistics for in-person meeting
a. Dates
At the September 2010 meeting, April 20-21 were identified as tentative dates for the next meeting.
b. Location
At the September 2010 meeting, Ottawa and Baltimore were identified as possible sites for the next meeting. Those who expressed an opinion on this call preferred Ottawa, and Dicus and Walsh agreed to speak with Stewart about hosting.
V. Review upcoming dates and events
a. Deadline for change requests: March 1, 2011
b. Next monthly call: Thursday, February 17, 2011; 1pm Eastern
January 20, 2011 – Conference Call
Present
Sue Boettcher – 3M
Susan Campbell – College Center for Library Automation
Rob Walsh – EnvisionWare (Maintenance Agency)
Mike Dicus – Ex Libris (Incoming Chair)
Eric Leckbee – Innovative Interfaces
John Bodfish – OCLC
Rob Gray – Pilot Consulting representing Polaris Library Systems
Dhaval Kotecha – RapidRadio
Thalia Dixson – The Library Corporation
Regrets
Mary Jackson – Auto-Graphics
Kevin Stewart – Relais International
Karen Wetzel - NISO
Agenda
I. Introduce NCIP SC Chair – Mike Dicus
Walsh introduced Dicus as the new chairperson for the NCIP Standing Committee. Walsh indicated that Dicus must be formally approved by the Discovery To Delivery (D2D) Topic Committee, and that an item has been added to the agenda for the next D2D conference call scheduled for January 28, 2011.
II. Progress review on NCIP 2.01 Revision
Walsh indicated that NISO has nearly completed its final edits on the NCIP 2.01 revisions. The editor posed a number of questions and comments, and Walsh was able to address all but one. He asked the group whether anyone objects to reordering Table 1 in Section 5.2 of Part 1 to be consistent with the ordering of the elements as they are presented in Section 5.4 rather than in alphabetical order as they are now. No objections were raised. Walsh agreed to communicate with the editor so that the edits can be completed and the revised standard can be posted.
III. Review past action items and priorities
a. Documentation
i. Is NCIP Restful?
The group agreed that the primary motivation for this documentation was no longer relevant and no further work needed to be done with this item.
ii. NCIP Statement Regarding Versions
Walsh indicated that a statement regarding versions was added to the 2.01 revisions. This item, therefore, should be considered complete.
iii. NCIP for Dummies (Getting Started with NCIP)
Bodfish indicated that there may have been an early draft of this document, but its current status is unknown. The group agreed that there remains a need for this document.
iv. Core Messages Explained
Walsh reported that a draft of this document was discussed at the September 2010 meeting, but all of the revisions were made on paper and may have been misplaced. Dicus said that he might have an electronic copy of the original draft and that he would look for it. [Editor’s Note: Dicus was able to locate the original draft. Walsh will look to see if he can find an electronic copy with the various edits from the in-person review.]
b. On-line Projects
i. Implementer Registry
Campbell reported that there are 4 US implementers and 2 non-US implementers listed in the registry. She added that it is being used. She said that a minor design flaw has been identified. The system does not properly handle having two registered users for the same vendor. The flaw is not causing problems at the moment, but if the system is revised in the future, the flaw should be addressed. Campbell agreed to speak with Wetzel about having NISO assume the on-going costs associated with hosting the system.
ii. NCIP Implementers Forum
Kotecha reported that the site was up and available. Walsh loaded the site and reported that it has had recent use. However, much of the content is spam (some of which is written in Russian). Gray agreed to talk with John Barr about cleaning up the spam, and Walsh suggested that we should revisit the issue of vetting subscribers to prevent spam.
c. Other
i. Social gathering at ALA Annual
The group has hosted social gatherings at the last two ALA Annual conferences. The first was not well attended, but the second was seen as successful. The group agreed that it should plan to host another gathering at this year’s ALA Annual meeting in New Orleans. Dicus agreed to begin looking for a time in the program.
IV. Discuss logistics for in-person meeting
a. Dates
At the September 2010 meeting, April 20-21 were identified as tentative dates for the next meeting.
b. Location
At the September 2010 meeting, Ottawa and Baltimore were identified as possible sites for the next meeting. Those who expressed an opinion on this call preferred Ottawa, and Dicus and Walsh agreed to speak with Stewart about hosting.
V. Review upcoming dates and events
a. Deadline for change requests: March 1, 2011
b. Next monthly call: Thursday, February 17, 2011; 1pm Eastern
