ICOLC Endorsements by CARLI Board
Bernie Sloan
The CARLI Board discussed CARLI endorsement of various International Coalition of Library Consortia (ICOLC) documents at its November Board meeting. The Executive Committee also discussed this topic at last week’s Executive Committee conference call. Since the December Board meeting is just a few days away, Mary Munroe wants to delay action until the January Board meeting.
In the meantime, I have prepared the following summary to help guide the discussions at the January meeting. Mary has asked me to distribute it now to give you all plenty of lead time to review the documents in question prior to next month’s meeting.
I believe that CARLI should most probably endorse the following documents:
1. Statement of Current Perspective and Preferred Practices for the selection and purchase of electronic information (March 1998, Updates: December 2001, October 2004)
Original: http://www.library.yale.edu/consortia/statement.html
Update
#1: http://www.library.yale.edu/consortia/2001currentpractices.htm
Update
#2: http://www.library.yale.edu/consortia/2004currentpractices.htm
A consortium must be “in general agreement” with these documents in order to be a member of ICOLC. Note: the updates do not replace earlier documents. They add to them.
The original description of the document from 1998 reads:
"The document addresses current and future electronic information environment issues such as the increasing expectations of library users in a stable funding environment, fair use, archiving of information, pricing strategies, and electronic information delivery metrics. The preferred practices section covers contract negotiations, pricing, data access and archiving, system platforms, licensing terms, information content and its management, and user authentication."
The 2004 update adds:
“Increasingly, today's publishers act globally to provide electronic information, and it is incumbent upon libraries to act globally to express their market positions about pricing and other terms and conditions related to purchase of published information. This document updates the ICOLC's earlier statements about today's electronic information environment, our desired environment for the future, and preferred practices for library consortia and their member libraries to achieve these desired outcomes. In this general update, we emphasize economic and pricing matters, which have remained a significant concern since the first meetings of the ICOLC in 1996 and throughout the Statements we have issued.”
2. Privacy
Guidelines for Electronic Resources Vendors (July 2002)
http://www.library.yale.edu/consortia/2002privacyguidelines.html
“The Privacy Guidelines focus on the privacy interests of our member libraries’ users in the interest of informing the companies with which we do business about what is acceptable in the products and services that we license. A cardinal principle of librarianship is that the privacy of the library users with respect to their information seeking is to be protected, and the members of the ICOLC are committed to this principle.”
3. Guidelines for Statistical Measures of Usage of Web-Based Information Resources (Update: December 2001)
December 2001: http://www.library.yale.edu/consortia/2001webstats.htm
From the original 1998 version:
“The participating consortia of the ICOLC have a responsibility to their library members to ensure the provision of usage information of licensed electronic resources. Information providers should want the same information to better understand the market f or their services as well as to create an informed customer base. These mutual interests can be best met by defining and creating a common set of basic use information requirements that are an integral and necessary part of any electronic product offering. These requirements apply to vendor operated web sites and to software provided to libraries or consortia for local operation. Information providers are encouraged to go beyond these minimal requirements as appropriate for their specific electronic resources.”
The 2001 update adds:
“The 2001 revision is intended to provide consortia administrators with the information needed to effectively carry out their responsibilities and to provide vendors a practical framework in which to deliver usage statistics in the current environment. The data elements to be reported have been simplified, while administrative aspects of confidentiality, access, delivery, and report format have been strengthened.”
Additionally, there are two other documents that I don’t think CARLI should endorse. They were OK at the time they were first published, but I think they are too dated now, and it wouldn’t make sense for CARLI to endorse them:
1. Endorsement of the Bath Profile (December 2001)
“The Bath Profile is an international Z39.50 specification supporting library applications and resource discovery. Version 1.1 of the Profile, released in June 2000, with minor clarifications in February 2001, is endorsed as an ISO Internationally Recognized Profile (IRP).”
2. Guidelines for Technical Issues in Request for Proposal (RFP) Requirements and Contract Negotiations (January 1999)
“The Guidelines For Technical Issues In Request For Proposal (RFP) Requirements And Contract Negotiations addresses the nature of the vendor’s content and accessibility and the issues of service, quality, and response time. Based on problems identified during negotiations with the vendor before a contract is executed a variety of actions may be required, including system mirroring and the addition of network or system capacity. These actions may be specified as part of the contract and may include commitments by the vendor should future problems arise.”