Art
Libraries Society of
Roosevelt Hotel
The
meeting was convened at 5:00 p.m. at the Roosevelt Hotel.
Attending: Nedda Ahmed (new editor of ARLIS/NA Web
site), Rachel Beckwith, Judy Dyki, Jonathan Franklin, Paul Glassman, Jennifer
Hehman, Roger Lawson, Betsy Peck Learned, Eileen Markson, Jack Robertson, Lee
Sorensen, Joan Stahl, Daniel Starr, Linda Zieper, Kathy Zimon.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Paul
Glassman thanked Vicky Roper (of ARLIS/NA Headquarters), Daniel Starr, Jonathan
Franklin, and Terrie Wilson for their contributions to the work of the
Committee and to the publications program of ARLIS/NA. He indicated that co-chair Debra Kruse sent
her regrets for being unable to attend.
CHAIRS'
REPORT
Paul
briefly discussed his annual report, which he had distributed earlier to
members of the Committee. There was a
brief discussion of the work on Facilities Standards, which needs updating. The Standards Committee is working on
it. B.J. Irvine, author of the original
publication, is eager to work with others on the update itself.
The
Task Force on the ARLIS/NA Web site is discussing the future of the site, its
directory structure, navigations and links, and the design of the site. The Task Force may consult sources outside
ARLIS/NA about these aspects. There need
to be revisions to the sub-level pages.
EDITORIAL
REPORTS
▪
Board liaison
Daniel Starr hopes to update the ARLIS/NA Web site so
as to eventually stop publishing the Handbook
and Membership Directory in print, but the 2004 handbook will be published in print.
▪
Occasional
Papers
Editor of Occasional
Papers Paul Glassman showed the Committee OP #14, which is now being sold
(200 copies were produced). He has put
out a call for new OP proposals. The
results are varied; some might be good candidates for electronic publication
instead of print. The question was asked
as to why the salary survey was done only for academic libraries (the question
here being, what is the purpose of the salary survey?). There are two proposals, one on staffing
standards, the other on core competencies.
Paul asked that the Board liaison introduce these projects to the
Executive Board, along with the concerns raised by their reviewers. Betsy Peck Learned stated that the staffing
standards need to be fleshed out before being submitted to the Board. It was suggested that the reviewers’ comments
should be addressed by the proposers of the OP's prior to the projects’
presentation to the Board. Lee Sorensen
commented that the project on core competencies is ready to go to the Board,
but not the others.
Jack Robertson said that the Executive Board could
give us more guidance about electronic production of our publications. Which will be for members only, what are the
tangible benefits of membership, what about print on demand? Betsy Peck Learned has been through the
discussion of both facility and staffing standards many times and feels that
there are many difficulties in comparing employment situations and
salaries. The publication on core
competencies should come first as an OP.
▪
Art
Documentation
Kathy Zimon, reporting for Art Documentation, brought up the question of retrospective
indexing. Members have expressed
interest in having a Web version of the index. There was some discussion of how
to finance such a retrospective index.
It appears that
▪
ARLIS/NA
Update
Linda Zieper has spoken with Jeanne Brown (incoming
ARLIS/NA President) about rethinking the content of Update. It is no longer
really a news vehicle. Members have
been comfortable with paying the extra charge ($20.00/year) for the print
version. The electronic format
production is going well. Joan Stahl
asked how many people use the electronic version (very few do). Should we ask again if people want to receive
it via e-mail? We need to revisit Update’s ‘news’ function. Could Linda maintain a list of those who want
Update via e-mail, those who want it
on the Web, or in print? Linda said that
she does not have sufficient time to cope with lengthy lists and could only do
this, for instance, if the ‘print’ version list were small. Jack Robertson said that we need a transition
period before any of these changes might be made, as well as a rethinking of
what Update is and contains.
▪
ARLIS/NA Web
site
Jonathan Franklin spoke about the ‘for members only’
section of the Web site. How does
ARLIS/NA handle news items: posting, removing, how frequently could members’
handbook be updated if it became an electronic publication? This is the first year that the conference
Web site was handled as a subset of the ARLIS/NA Web site, instead of being hosted
by a local sponsor. He said this was
“lots of work!”
Jack Robertson asked whether we could eliminate the
front matter of the Handbook and
Membership Directory if it becomes an electronic publication. We would need to make sure that the front
matter is replicated elsewhere, in a permanent way, on the ARLIS/NA Web
site. Daniel Starr wondered what the
cost differential would be to do this.
He would prefer to continue including this material in the Handbook unless it would make a major
financial difference to eliminate it.
CURRENT
BUSINESS
In
regard to the EBSCO proposal for full-text electronic publication of Art Documentation, it was thought best
to turn this over to Jack Robertson, incoming chair of the Publications
Committee, for further discussion and possible action.
NEW
BUSINESS
Paul
Glassman turned over the leadership of the remaining discussion to Jack
Robertson.
▪
Web
publication of NH schedule
Daniel Starr spoke on the possible publication of the
NH schedule for photography materials: do we want to reissue an updated version
via a Web publication capable of being updated regularly? Jonathan Franklin asked how we organize the
Web site so that people can get to the NH schedule.
▪
Web site
planning
Jack Robertson suggested that we establish an
ARLIS/NA Web site Contents Editorial Board (he presented his document about
this). Such a Board would work closely
with the Web site editor. Daniel Starr
suggested that such a body might better be called a Task Force, not an
Editorial Board, since the Executive Board has not yet come up with priorities
for the Web site and has disbanded the Web site advisory group. We need a “content management system” which
would inform the way Nedda Ahmed will enable the Web site to function, as well
as the process and design characteristics of the site.
We might go out and find a new Web designer, and
learn how best to store and archive information. The quality of the Web site has implications
for donors and for recruiting new members.
The
meeting was adjourned at
Minutes
taken and prepared by Eileen Markson.