| hi Andy, thanks for your comments and we're glad to see you jumping in! I'm about to post the recording of the August 30 webinar following this email, so you can check that out for yourself.
Each of the SIG subgroups (Metadata, Discovery, Distribution, Accessibility) has had only one 60-minute call each so far, which was meant to provide some more space for brainstorming as part of group start-up. The notes you see from the slides for the August 30 webinar are simply a summary of the items that came up. I think example items you list below are certainly possible recommendations from the SIG - we just hadn't gotten that far in the processing and discussion.
For each call, we had a few 'conversation starters' - people who work in the field who could provide some of their views on the issues and statuses - and then we encouraged participation from others on the call. For each call we had 12-20 people on the call (I think), but similar to you I think weather and vacations prevented others from participating. We picked these four topics because on the survey we ran in late July with the Core group, these had the most "urgent ratings" - but we found, indeed, on the calls that there are lots of overlap, and there are other related topics that we'd like to explore in the future, potentially with additional subgroups after these subgroups have run their course.
This week I plan to send out Doodle polls to set up subsequent calls for each subgroup, and on those calls we can use the brainstorming notes to help figure out what could be group outputs. The groups are not set in stone and we will continue to welcome all viewpoints and stakeholders on the calls.
Todd's also covered in each of the webinars and the subgroup calls the overall purpose of the E-Book SIG:
1) Coordination and Collaboration: our community is very diverse; we spread across the range of content creators, content format and hosting platforms, sales channels, the library community, and beyond. Each of these has its own special interest group (i.e. ALA, BISG) which are all thinking of ebook issues from their own perspectives. We want to bridge these communities and help all understand what is taking place, where, and where are intersections between these efforts? We're sure no one has enough resources to duplicate efforts - so one of the goals of the E-Book SIG is to draw people together to help discuss issues that affect all of us, and put the information to use in different communities. NISO doesn't need to be involved in all the projects -- but we'd also be happy to help collaborate to get work done and hope the E-Book SIG can provide a venue for this sharing.
2) Research: What are the questions in the space of e-books need to be undertaken; what do we need to learn about how people are using e-books, having problems with e-books. Can we commission research? Some could be done by volunteers, could be done by a consultant (from NISO or other organizations), or could we simply compile "meta-research," or outcomes that have taken place on pilot projects in various communities? For example, a lot has been written in the library community about PDA; what can we learn about drawing conclusions across all of these projects?
3) Incubation: The E-book SIG will not necessarily be the group that undertakes all of this new work. However, it can come up with ideas, generate "work item" proposals expanding on it, generate interest in participation in carrying out the actual work. Participation in the E-book SIG doesn't mean one would develop a schema for ebook distribution or discovery or interchange, but a participant could incubate the ideas and pass to another group who would undertake the actual work. (That said, E-Book SIG participants are not prohibited from participation on NISO working groups and we do hope there will be such direct input as well.)
4) Prioritization: There are only a limited number of hours in the day to focus on standardization. What projects are the most critical to get done in the shortest timeframe; we could potentially come up with a list of 50-60 project ideas -- we need help to determine which of these are the most important and which will have the biggest impact. What research and incubation will make the most difference?
5) Education: Education is critical in the standards development process; standards shouldn't end when consensus is reached and the publication is final. Education needs to continue through the adoption phase; we'll need to get the word out about what has been accomplished so far, what needs to happen and how does one implement the standard or schema/how does one adhere to best practices. We'd like to focus on public awareness building or marketing, which can be done through a variety of means - webinars, publications (including "Information Standards Quarterly," our monthly newsletter, in-person events such as our upcoming E-Book Forum in October, open teleconferences, etc. We very much hope the E-book SIG will contribute ideas and content as we reach out to the community.
Let the conversation continue! Nettie
---------------------- Nettie Lagace Associate Director for Programs National Information Standards Organization (NISO) One North Charles Street, Suite 1905 Baltimore, MD 21201 Mobile: 617-863-0501 Fax: 410-685-5278
On Sep 1, 2011, at 4:39 PM, Andrew Weissberg wrote: Hi Todd and Nettie,
Thanks for sharing this, and sorry that I have been unable to participate over the course of the past week or so because of hurricane, vacation schedules, etc.
Having reviewed the deck, and assuming that some of the following may have been discussed or addressed on the call, some initial questions, comments and feedback:
-In addition to what is seemingly a common "overlap" for all of the subgroups — Metadata -- It is not entire clear as to what the expected "outputs" for each WG seek to accomplish or deliver as an end-state deliverable– while each sub-group has defined numerous issues and challenges, with some exceptions, most of the material isn't geared to communicate solutions that can be put into practice –
-There seem to be several major assumptions or conclusions made in each focus area, which in some cases seem to lack validation or are broadly stated without underlying assumptions or dimensions that would serve to validate the assumption, and what the WG's will do to address them as part of an action item —
-for example, slide 16 point: "Publishers may not see value in providing MARC records; outsource the process"…how is "value" being defined? In what context? Using what metrics? Is the action item here to execute a value perception study and/or gap analysis among publishers/libraries that would aim to change this perception and also reinforce value, ID best practices?
-Or another example, "Subject categorization changes can affect sales – how to use keywords?" -- as a potential action item, is the workgroup and its participants going to come up with a framework and pilot study to validate this assumption from an SEO/SEM-to-discovery-to-sale dimension or other dimensions that can be commonly utilized…
-Some of the initiatives (stated as "initial work") seem to require extensive collaboration with other standards organizations, or to be made "valuable" in practice would require "buy-in" from key for-profit stakeholders (Apple, Adobe, Amazon, etc.) who may or may not be represented in the workgroup or aren't NISO members. For example, "ISBN for e-books" - assumes major collaboration with ISBN-IA and Editeur…and assumes alignment across stakeholders on a number of levels…or, "International Standardization of EPUB3"---assumes IDPF collaboration (of course) but is the goal here to establish EPUB3 as an ISO Standard?
"Some Initial Work" (slide 19) suggests that a "charter" for each that communicates goals/objectives, demonstrates outputs, use cases, benefits, gaps, feasibility and expected paths/activities/requirements to accomplish them has been established and agreed on by members and key stakeholders. If that isn't the case, I'd urge us all to consider this approach and assume that each WG head will maintain this responsibility as part of governance and to ensure efforts and contributions are aligned with goals/objectives
Happy to discuss after Labor Day holiday, and wish everyone a great holiday weekend!
All my best, Andy W.
Andy Weissberg, Managing Partner Digital Publishing Partners, LLC 344 Walthery Avenue Ridgewood, NJ 07450 (c): 201.906.2967
|
KMLM List