OCLC CJK Users Group 2000 Annual Meeting
Saturday, March 11, 2000
Quality Resort Hotel
825 Hotel Circle South
San Diego, CA


(Continental Breakfast provided)

Agenda:


Minutes

    Preview of the New Z39.50 Client

    Marty Withrow, Director of Technical Services Development division, OCLC, demonstrated an enhanced version of this client, which is currently being Beta-tested. The contents of his presentation is available at

    http://www.oclc.org/oclc/cjk/report/cjkz39/index.htm

    Report of the Task Force on Pinyin Conversion

    Hsi-chu Bolick reported on the activities of the Task Force on Pinyin Conversion. Organized by the Chinese Officer, the goals for 1999-2000 were to organize/update available information for the Users Group; to facilitate communication between the Users Group and OCLC on conversion service plans; and to provide a forum for the Users Group to express, discuss and share ideas on effective conversion of local data.

    After introducing the Task Force members (Sarah Elman of UCLA, Wen-ling Liu of Indiana University, Phyllis Wang of UC, Davis, and Hsi-chu Bolick, Chair, of UNC-Chapel Hill), Ms. Bolick gave a summary of the Task Force activities.

    On May 14, 1999, the Task Force released the first report, Pinyin Conversion Status by Wen-ling Liu & Phyllis Wang. http://oclccjk.lib.uci.edu/task1.htm

    On June 21, 1999, the Task Force released the second report, Wade-Giles to Pinyin Conversion: Australian Experience and Local Issues by Sarah Elman. http://oclccjk.lib.uci.edu/task2.htm

    In June-August, 1999, member input was solicited, and Chicago Public Library, University of Oregon responded.

    Regarding the year 2000 and beyond, Ms Bolick reminded the new timelines. Conversion of Authority Files will take place in July 2000 (Name Authority File) and August 2000 (Subject Authority File). Split files will occur at this point. From August to October 2000 is the LC gap period.

    Then Ms. Bolick projected likely scenes in the library in the summer 2000: split files, missing records caused by conversion errors (a scene that is likely to happen if local records have poor cataloging quality), and raised stress levels for the librarians. In order to minimize complications, Ms Bolick emphasized that having clean databases before the conversion was crucial. In order to prepare the local database for the conversion, she urged that the quality of the local databases be examined as soon as possible. She recommended that each library try to develop efficient ways to clean up their databases, such as identifying error patterns (e.g. the use of diacritics, etc.).

    Then she offered the following survival tips when dealing with split files. Always search both romanization schemes, Pinyin and Wade-Giles, before concluding anything. Train the staff to do the same. Check on pinyin conversion marker on a regular basis to make sure record status on the conversion (see field 987 for bibliographic record and field 008/07for authority records). Ms. Bolick then urged the audience to share information on effective ways to deal with the problems.

    Ms Wang opened the floor for comments and questions. Karl Lo thanked OCLC for being very cooperative and responsive to his suggestions. He reiterated that, in layman’s term, Z39.50 is only a display devise. It cannot support searching or editing. Searching is done by each library’s own OPAC. If the host database does not have CJK, the Z39.50 client cannot display CJK; however, it easily accesses other CJK databases in the world. It supports both pinyin and Wade-Giles romanization schemes, as easily as a click of a button.

    A question was raised as to what other local systems have successfully implemented the OCLC CJK Z39.50 client. Karl Lo answered by saying that any system that has a Z39.50 server will work. He further mentioned that the records do not have to be in US MARC or EACC either. Any C, J, K character codes and MARC formats will serve just as well.

    There was a suggestion that all searchable sites be included in the pull down menu in the program. Marty Withrow responded that it can easily be done, but it would be impractical, since IP addresses change all the time. Instead, a suggestion was made that it could be incorporated in the Users Group’s web page.

    A question was raised about the multiple call numbers being displayed on the Z39.50 client, while only one call number is valid for the local site. Hisako Kotaka responded by saying that there is a way to "flag" the valid call number for one’s site. [recorder’s note: In a follow up email, Marty Withrow said that the new version will be totally configurable, allowing the users to decide which fields to display and in what order they should appear on the screen.]

    After a 10-minute break, there were reports by OCLC staff. The contents of the reports are available from http://www.oclc.org/oclc/cjk/report/2000cjk/index.htm. Recorded below are only the questions and answers.

    There were many questions regarding the possibility of combining the conversion options offered by OCLC. Mr. Patton said that, basically, the options could not be combined. Regarding the possibility of upgrading lower level records in Option 1 for additional fee, Mr. Patton said that it had not been discussed, but he would find out. Regarding the possibility of getting related authority records, Mr. Patton said that authority work is separately priced, although the pricing information is not currently available. Will non-CJK records with Chinese names be included in the conversion? The answer was yes. There was a request that a letter be sent to each CJK member institution, summarizing the conversion options that OCLC offers. Mr. Patton responded that the best source for that information is the OCLC Web site. To the question of whether OCLC would make the conversion software available, Mr. Patton replied that OCLC is not in the business of distributing this kind of software. The software that OCLC develops to meet its own needs would not be usable in other environments.

    A question was raised why OCLC’s pricing is higher than that of RLG’s. Mr. Patton answered that, according to the agreement between OCLC and the Users Council, OCLC does not seek outside grant funding, and all costs must be recovered through charges to the customers. OCLC has a custom quote system in which the pricing will depend on the volume of work.

    There were questions on any plans for CJK or multilingual support for ILL and SiteSearch. Mr. Patton said that they have not been talked about. In response to the question about JACKPHY languages development, Mr. Patton said that, although not all JACKPHY languages are supported at this point, Arabic is being developed. Other scripts are under consideration.

    The meeting adjourned at 12:00.


Respectfully submitted,

Joy Kim, Recorder
University of Southern California