As of 22 April 2009 IFLA has a totally redesigned new website
This old website and all of its content will stay on as archive – http://archive.ifla.org
As of 22 April 2009 IFLA has a totally redesigned new website
This old website and all of its content will stay on as archive – http://archive.ifla.org
    Bibliography Section
Newsletter
| |||||||||
 |
 |
 |
Dear colleagues and friends,
It was nice to meet many of you in Glasgow. For those who had the opportunity to visit the IFLA 2002 Conference in Glasgow, this Newsletter will be a reminder of the Bibliography Section’s professional and social activities. For those who could not come, the Newsletter will summarize the Activities of the Section.
Thanks to the photos http://jib-info.cuni.cz/foto/ifla2002/index/index.htm
you can have the feeling of being in Scotland! You will find in
this issue of the Newsletter also the most important information on the Section’s
plans for Berlin and Buenos Aires.
The goal of our call for contributions is to identify matters or items that can be published in this Newsletter, or discussed at the meetings or in the electronic conference of the Bibliography Standing Committee.
We wish you a happy holiday season and a happy new year.
| Bohdana Stoklasova | Talbott Huey |
| Chair | Secretary |
2. Activities of the Section at the IFLA Annual Conference in Glasgow and its Plans for Berlin and Buenos Aires
The conference participants can find a summary of the Section’s
activities in the brochure presented during the conference. It is available at
http://archive.ifla.org/VII/s12/conf/glasgow1.jpg
http://archive.ifla.org/VII/s12/conf/glasgow2.jpg
Open Activities of the Bibliography Section
IFLA Division IV Open ForumBibliography and National Libraries Open Session
Bibliography and National Libraries Workshop
Standing Committee Meetings
Meeting 1
Present were: Bohdana Stoklasova (Chair), Talbott Huey (Secretary) Kirsten Waneck (Information Coordinator), Marcelle Beaudiquez, Francoise Bourdon, John Byrum, D. Whitney Coe, Alan Danskin, Pilar Dominguez Sanchez, Tuula Haapamaki, Unni Knutsen, Eva Tedenmyr, Aleksandra Teplitskaya, Claudia Werner, Maja Zumer.
1. Introductions were made.
2. Approvals of the minutes of the last meetings (Boston, 2001), the Annual Report 2001-2002, and the Financial Report for the same period were solicited and obtained electronically before the meeting, and this practice will continue. The agenda for the current meeting was approved. Bohdana Stoklasova in commenting on the Financial Report noted that Section funds had paid for one issue of the Section newsletter and two printed brochures describing the Section’s Strategic Plan and the program for the Glasgow conference. She raised the question of distributing such materials in the future: should they be distributed wholly or partly by electronic means? It was decided for now that Kirsten Waneck would bring up the matter at the meeting of information officers and report back.
3. Bohdana and Talbott Huey reported on the previous day’s meeting of the Division IV Coordinating Board, chaired by Ia McIlwaine. First, as a way of incorporating the interests and work of Division VIII more closely into the work of other divisions (as mandated in 2001), each section was to name a liaison person to attend the various “area” meetings to initiate discussions on cooperation, and report back. Talbott volunteered to do this.
The major question at CB I was the fate of UBCIM, which is scheduled for dissolution in March 2003. The Board distributed two proposals already before the Governing Board: one by the National Library of Portugal to house and administer the UNIMARC program, and the other by the Deutsche Bibliothek to do the same (with modifications) for UBC. After discussion, it was decided that the CB would recommend to the Governing Board that Division IV take responsibility for UBC as part of its regular work. Several Committee members discussed the decision and wanted further input. John Byrum felt that some permanent staff was needed for UBC to function properly. It was decided to circulate the proposals to Committee members and take up the discussion again at SC II, with comments to be transmitted to CB II or directly to Ia.4. Discussion turned to the Section’s planned program for the Glasgow conference. Talbott reported that Graham Taylor of the British Publishers Association, a planned speaker at our Open Session on publisher-national library relations, had only the day before declined to appear, thus unfortunately underlining the theme that these relations were often problematical. Kirsten noted that Elena Zhabko was unable to appear for our Workshop on the future of bibliographic control; her paper would be read by someone else or omitted.
5. Unni Knutsen brought up the matter of the letter the Section plans to send to all national bibliographic agencies concerning the two reports initiated by the Section in 2001; namely, the Bell-Langballe Report on national bibliographies’ adherence to ICNBS recommendations, and Unni’s report noting the changes in national bibliographies over the past five years. A draft of the letter was written by Whitney Coe, and would be circulated to the Committee for approval at SC II. Talbott mentioned that he had sent a short message to CDNL informing all that the two reports were posted on IFLANET. Whitney and John suggested further publicity through ALA, ACRL, and their international counterparts.
6. The committee proceeded to discuss future programs. In this context Bohdana called for contributions to the Section newsletter, one of which would have to spell out our plans in detail. Two proposals arose out of the Strategic Plan, one to have a session in Berlin on developing guidelines to help national bibliographic agencies start or improve bibliographic services, and one for a session on developing guidelines for publishing national bibliographies in electronic form. Maja Zumer and Marcelle Beaudiquez pointed out that these were separate but related efforts, and suggested that we should be compiling basic, practical information on both aspects as a useful package for NBAs. Bohdana said these efforts had originally been directed towards a pre-conference in Prague in spring 2003, but the Open Society Institute no longer has a program to allow complete funding for all the participants. OSI is prepared to encourage its local offices to fund participants from those countries, but this is not a reliable basis for organizing the pre-conference. After some discussion it became clear that we should discontinue planning for a pre-conference and instead organize a workshop for the Berlin conference in August 2003 on the same related subjects, with the main focus on electronic resources. Unni suggested a group was needed to decide on our approach, and noted that some funding would probably be available for workshops at the regional level. Others agreed, and Bohdana set up a working group (names later) to plan for long-term regional approaches to the matter. Maya agreed to organize and apply for a full-day workshop for Berlin.
7. Beacher Wiggins introduced the Library of Congress’ planned survey of CIP programs around the world, and distributed the proposed instrument for discussion at SC II. The survey is to collect information for LC planning, but is related to the national production of bibliographic information, which is the concern of our Section. Bohdana pointed out that starting a CIP program was like starting a national bibliography, and Marcelle noted possible connections with UBC. It was suggested that the results of the survey be presented for informational purposes at the Berlin conference.
Bohdana went on to describe the planned divisional workshop (or open session) on “subject gateways as emerging tools for creating national bibliographies.” All three sections of Division IV will participate. Thus in summary the Berlin conference will feature a Section workshop on guidelines on electronic national bibliographies. [Note: At the Division IV Coordinating Board meeting on August 23 it was made clear that the number of sessions in Berlin will be limited. Since all sections of the division will participate in a full day Division workshop, each section can hold only one additional session, either a workshop or an open session.] Some recommendations resulting from these sessions will become part of more complex guidelines, with examples and references, to help NBAs start or improve their bibliographic services. Planning and action concerning this more complex goal should start immediately, with results to be expected by 2004 in Buenos Aires, when there will be a Division workshop/open session on subject gateways. Connections with other sections in these efforts will be sought.8. A brief discussion followed on the problem of gaining publisher cooperation in producing national bibliographic information. Talbott noted that a steering committee of IFLA and the International Publishers Association was meeting at this conference, and promised to get in touch with them while considering possible future Section action on the issue—perhaps at the Buenos Aires conference in 2004. John mentioned the ONIX program, which delivers publisher data directly to the Library of Congress; his workshop paper was to give some information on this. [More information was also presented at the Division Open Forum].
The session was adjourned at 10:20.Meeting 2
The Committee met at 8 AM, August 23
Present were the above, plus Retha Snyman.
1. Bohdana asked for a decision on the allocation of the remaining E89 in the Section budget. Unni reported that the National Library of Norway had agreed to send out the letter mentioned under SCI, point 5, and would not object to having the expenses for the postage refunded. It was agreed that the Section money would thus be given to that library. The letter to the national libraries was circulated and discussed as agreed at SCI, and the text agreed upon.
Bohdana said it is now being reported that sections would no longer be able to name honorary advisors. Our section feels this is not a good decision. Such advisors are in fact more useful than “corresponding members,” who are never in communication.
It is now mandated that an open session must have a limit of two hours, and a workshop a limit of fifty participants. Francoise Bourdon pointed out that workshops were intended to provide intense interaction and exchange among participants, so this might be a reasonable rule. Kirsten agreed.
2. Kirsten reported on the meeting of Information Coordinators. With Sophie Felfoldi in charge of IFLANET, things were going well, and postings could occur with only a short wait. As for the question of distributing the newsletter electronically: NO. The IFLA Officers Handbook states such communications must be in printed form. Since many sections are interested in having an option, the Section on Library Theory and Research has agreed to propose a resolution allowing publication in electronic form.
IFLA also wants sections to suggest two or three papers each to be considered for IFLA Journal. These may be forwarded to Kirsten. Unni mentioned the planned seminar on national bibliographies in September 2002 as a good source of papers. Talbott said any of the three papers presented in the “publishers” open session would be suitable.
3. The discussion returned to the question of the future of UBC. Bohdana talked with Ia and Barbara Tillett of the Cataloguing Section, and they agreed that there was no need for an immediate decision, and that indeed some sort of coordinating person is needed. Francoise pointed out that the deadline is March 2003—when will a decision be made?
[Note: the IFLA office in Glasgow and the Governing Board meeting of August 24 made it clear that UBCIM-UNIMARC is a priority effort. It was agreed to accept the Portuguese offer for UNIMARC and ICBC, and to allocate the US$15,000 presently designated for UNIMARC to the Portuguese National Library. It will be called the UNIMARC Programme. A decision on UBC was deferred until December.]4. Evaluations were made of the Section activities at the current conference. Francoise, Talbott, Alan Danskin, and Pilar Dominguez briefly reported on contacts made with Division VIII units. Kirsten noted a successful workshop. The prescribed limit of fifty participants caused some concern at first, since there was considerable interest, and there was a seating problem at first, but the limit promoted good discussion, and few were turned away. Kirsten suggested a second workshop on the subject in Buenos Aires. Bohdana agreed, pointing out the importance of the issue, and suggested that the power point presentations should be included when the papers are posted on the Web, also noting the high quality of the papers. Kirsten replied that IFLA does not want to do this, and the major benefit of the power points was for participants, not for those outside the discussion. Unni suggested the authors could paste in graphics when preparing the papers for posting. It was noted that there is a limitation of four pages for workshop papers. Kirsten wanted to consider further how to enliven presentations, and advised that for next year’s workshops speakers should bring printouts of their power points. Attention was drawn to IFLA’s memo on hints to speakers for lively presentations.
Talbott reported that the open session on publisher-national library relations was also successful, with a total of about ninety attendees. The papers were all excellent and should find their way into paper publication as well as appearing on IFLANET. The Committee should maintain its interest in this matter and plan a session for 2004. General comments on the conference: praise for the speakers’ lounge and speakers’ rehearsal area, with professional help available; concern that fewer papers than usual available before the conference; concern that too many sessions on the same or closely related subject were going on at the same time; the need for more exhibition time.5. Bohdana reminded the Committee that elections will be held to replace leaving members in 2003. Kirsten and Francoise will be finishing their terms.
6. The Committee then examined accomplishments under the Strategic Plan 2001-2003.
7. The Committee again briefly took up the question of the Library of Congress CIP survey. Some said the value of CIP was in question in a number of countries (the Deutsche Bibliothek will drop it at the end of this year, for example) and the survey might reveal “if not, why not?” It was felt that the draft survey document did not clearly enough define exactly what CIP was or was meant to accomplish, and some suggestions were made as to phrasing. Beecher welcomed all such information. The results might be presented in Buenos Aires.
Goal 2.6 of the Strategic Plan states “Appoint a working group to investigate development and update of guidelines, with examples and references, to help NBAs start or improve bibliographic services.” Accordingly, Bohdana established a working group of herself, Whitney, Claudia, and Alan to work on the recommendations plan for a session on CIP in Buenos Aires in 2004. Another open session on publisher-national library relations and an open session specifically devoted to aiding those starting up a national bibliography program were also tentatively scheduled for Buenos Aires. The session was adjourned at 10 AM.Respectfully submitted,
Talbott Huey
3. Call for contributions
The goal of our call for contributions is to identify activities
you would like to discuss or share with colleagues worldwide connected with the
Section’s Strategic Plan (enclosed as hard copy with the Newsletter mailing,
and available online at the Section’s pages http://archive.ifla.org/VII/s12/annual/sp12.htm).
You may want to share your results and recommendations with
others, or seek advice to help you to start building or improving the
bibliography in your country. The contributions will be published in this
Newsletter, and/or discussed at the meetings or in the electronic conference of
the Bibliography Standing Committee scbib@cuni.cz.
