- BSTF (2005 Bibliographic Services Task Force Report)
- CAMCIG (Cataloging and Metadata Common Interest Group)
- UC CONSER (UC CONSER Funnel Program)
- CDL (California Digital Library)
- HOTS (Heads of Technical Services)
- HOTS SCP (Shared Cataloging Program Advisory Committee (SCP AC))
- JSTOR (JSTOR - short for Journal Storage)
- IEEE (Institution of Electrical and Electronic Engineers)
- CDC (Collection Development Committee)
- ACG (All Campus Group)
- ACIG (Acquisitions Common Interest Group)
- PAG (Preservation Advisory Group)
- PCC (Program for Cooperative Cataloging)
- HOSC (Heads of Special Collections)
- NGTS (Next Generation Technical Services)
Undoubtedly you know most of these.
The issues covered here are clearly some of the big picture type.
Next Generation Technical Services (NGTS) Charge that hopes to move to the network level and take advantage of collaboration among the UC. Also interested in low-hanging fruit of UCs.
Interesting that she leaves some of the needs up to bibliographers when I think that they have less and less time to contribute to these broader issues. Or is that really the case? Hm.
The difficulty Martha and most others have either pointed out or ignored is still one of whether there are enough people with interest or sufficient expertise to provide assistance in technical (metadata/cataloging/tagging/?) areas outside libraries. Do others with skill care enough to work on things that are not clearly of value to them right now?
Says that workflow models are not really great or discovered yet for various types of grey materials (e.g. scholarly websites).
The proposed models, funding and organizational structures are the more critical aspects of changes of this sort.
The other critical half is clearly the evaluative aspect. Martha has some ideas about how this works.
Martha refers to shared collecting and stuff like UCM being the repository for Springer books (those purchased online I presume).