TUG Statistics and Reports Group Meeting

Minutes
November 21, 2002 – 10:00 a.m.-12:20 p.m. – UG McLaughlin Library Room 034A

1. CARL / ARL / Maclean’s holdings reports
   The group reviewed the TUG Holdings Analysis spreadsheet prepared by Gail to provide Maclean’s/ARL/CARL holdings data and agreed that it was valid for Guelphand Waterlooand should be made available on the TSR web site.  

   To do: Joanne will provide the WLU figure for “Volumes held April 30, 2001”. Gail will update the spreadsheet to prepare it for posting on the TSR web site.

   Because Guelph and Waterlooare preparing CARL Survey responses for 2001/02 and WLU is required to submit similar data to OCUL, the group reviewed several pieces of holdings data and local interpretations of this data.

   The “Print Monograph Titles” count required for the CARL Supplementary Statistics Survey was discussed. Since shared records in the TRELLIS database prevent obtaining a valid count of bibliographic records by institution, we had agreed to use a holdings (MFHD) count but had not yet agreed on a TUG definition of a monograph. The Type of Record and Bibliographic Level codes used in bibliographic record headers were reviewed. The group agreed that the interpretation of  “Cartographic material” should be followed up with CARL. The following codes will be considered print monographs for the 2001/02 survey and for future surveys unless CARL discussion causes us to reconsider the definition:

   Type of Record a  Language material c  Notated music e  Cartographic material

   Bibliographic Level a  Component part, monographic  c  Collection m  Monograph item

   i.e. Records coded aa, ac, am, ca, cc, cm, ea, ec, and em will be considered monographs.

   To do: Gail will create a new category in the ARL/CARL cube for “CARL print monograph”.  After the 2001/02 surveys are completed, Ron will follow up with CARL on the cartographic interpretation.

   For the “Electronic monograph titles” count, the group agreed to use the “ARL CARL Electronic monograph title count2.ppr” report prepared by Gail.

   The source of data for “Current Serials Received – Number of electronic titles” will be the May 29, 2002 ejournals cube.

2. Security / access consultation with TUG Managers
   A draft message to TUG Managers and functional groups prepared by Ron was reviewed. 

   The group discussed the question of who should receive the message and agreed that TOMG’s tugmanagers-l list would be an appropriate way to reach Managers. The message will also be sent to those identified as attendees at the consultation sessions.

   Several consultation groups were identified:

   Acquisitions: Debbie Tytko, Linda DaMaren, Linda Cracknell, Susan Bellingham (for UW donor records), Carolyn Dirks, Sam Steiner, Lois Clifford

   Collections/IR: Joanne Oud, Tim Sauer, Scott Gillies (& Pam Jacobs?), Susan Routliffe (& others from UW?)

   User/Access Services: Donna Sartori, Heather Martin, Vera Fesnak, Sharon Lamont, Alex McCulloch (& Wish Leonard?), Carolyn Dirks, Sam Steiner, Lois Clifford (& other UW libraries: Optometry, TRACE, Career Resources?)

   Cataloguing: Betty Graf, Linda Day, Brooke Skelton

   Since they are involved in multiple areas, it might make best use the UW affiliated library managers’ time if a separate meeting was held at the end to review the results of the consultations with the other groups.

   After the consultations are completed, we will prepare a summary for the information of the libraries’ senior management groups.

   To do: Ron will revise the message to Managers. We will send the email next week, after which Gail and Bill will arrange the consultation sessions.

3. TUG Cognos staff training team planning
   A draft message to TUG staff prepared by Joanne was reviewed. Since the request involves a significant time commitment for members of the training team, the message will be sent first to Managers, then to tugstaff-l. Before proceeding with this request, we need to explore training options and costs and prepare a Cognos training proposal for approval by the Steering Committee.

   Training for the training team should include PowerPlay web data exploration, Impromptu web reports introduction, and PowerPlay desktop client. There should also be training in Impromptu reports creation for at least a subgroup at a later date. Training options to be considered include training by Cognos staff or other companies offering Cognos training, and at on-site or off-site locations.

   To do: Joanne will revise the message to TUG staff. Ron will obtain information about training options and costs.

4. Cube archiving / CDROM burning
   Bill and Gail have placed last year’s data and the early cubes for 2002/03 into an archive area on the web reports server. The next step in proceeding with the TUG Cognos Project recommendation on archiving will be to burn archived data to CDROM. The TSR group approved the burning of one CDROM per fiscal year, with copies for each institution.

   To do: Bill and Gail will arrange the CDROM burning and will document the archiving schedule.

5. Regular cube builds
   The TUG Cognos Project group recommended that TUG institute regular weekly cube rebuilds. Gail reported that she is now able to do cube rebuilds in batch jobs and suggested that we implement regularly scheduled rebuilds. The TSR group suggested that monthly rebuilds should be sufficient at this time but that consultation with TOMG about server load concerns would be required before proceeding.

   To do: Linda and Gail will consult with Charles about how best to bring this issue to TOMG.

6. Other business
   The question of using one of the old ERL or TRELLIS servers to spread the reports server load was reviewed. It is still too early to determine whether or not this is required. If TUG has other uses for these servers, they should not be held for TSR.

7. Agenda planning / next meeting
   Future agenda identified at the previous meeting:
   • Reports listserv implementation
   • Reports request process /procedural issues