Prepared by Grace Agnew for the pre-test review committee:

Jane Johnson (Chair)
Grace Agnew
Liz Scheines
Judith Hoffman-Bashant
Jim DeRoest
Ed Price

1. Organization UID

Issue: In order to use the LC-assigned organization number, we need to contact LC about batch number assignments, based on monthly registrations. It would be too cumbersome to ask organizations to request their own numbers. Some organizations will already have numbers, or parent organizations with numbers.

2. Organization name

Issues: Is use of ampersand a problem for indexing? Example: Oregon Health & Science University. What about hyphens and slashes? E.g. Berman-Bogdan Productions, Inc./Footagefinders. --Periods, e.g. Experimental Television Center Ltd. One respondent used an initial article "The" which can affect alphabetic sorting for display. Instructions should ask respondents to omit initial articles. For organizations with names that consist solely of generic terms, should we ask that they include the parent organization in the name? Example: The Rutgers University Libraries entry gives the org name, "Special Collections and University Archives." The parent org name is, "Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey." However, the special collections dept is part of Rutgers University Libraries so should the org name be "Rutgers University Libraries Special Collections and University Archives"? A similar situation exists for the Rare Book and Manuscript Library at Columbia University.

3. Organization alternative name 1
4. Organization alternative name 2

Issues: Should organizations with compound noun names, such as "ScreenSound" and "ResearchChannel" use the Alternative name fields to spell out "Screen Sound" and "Research Channel" as separate words? Some respondents did not use the AltName to add either a common acronym or to spell out an acronym. Should the instructions provide examples splitting compound names and spelling out abbreviations?

Comments from Feedback form:

· Need to be more explicit on Alt. names and multi-names

· found these fields confusing

5. Parent organization

Issues: Responses seem very straightforward. It's interesting that the Columbia Rare Book and Manuscript Library lists "Columbia University" as the parent organization. "Butler Library" appears only in the organization address. Rutgers University Special Collections and Archives lists "Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey" as the parent organization, rather than "Rutgers University Libraries." How likely is it that end users will search on these intermediate supervisory levels?

One respondent indicated that this field provided insufficient space

6. Administrative contact title

Issues: At least half the respondents provided personal names rather than titles. While this can result in some violation of privacy and lack of accuracy when people change jobs, this isn't an indexed field so it's probably not an important issue. This rarely occurs. Also did not notice typos. Instructions should be clear that "title" not personal name, should be provided.

Comments from Feedback Form:

One respondent indicated that this field did not provide sufficient space.

Several respondents indicated they did not understand this field. One of these respondents asked, " Is Administrative contact a head honcho type (Director) or phone call fielder? I wasn't sure whether to put the director or our receptionist. Neither seemed appropriate. What are we trying to get here? "

7. Organization address
8. Organization mailing address

Issues, 7-8: For some reason, "State/Province" is not available for most respondents. Enough respondents completed the "State/Province" field that this appears not to be a programming issue. We would like to have a drop-down list that varies depending on the country selected. Providing this drop-down list may make this easier. The field should perhaps be more prominent.

The other critical issue is that, internationally, zip codes may be appear before city or state/province, rather than after the state/province. "Frank's compulsive guide to postal addresses" at http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/postal.html provides guidance on postal addresses. Many European countries use "postal code town" rather than "town region postal code" as in the U.S. In some countries, "state/province" is optional. Since the primary purpose of this field is to display addresses, it may make sense to simply provide sufficient lines for addresses and to emphasize separate country, state/province and metropolitan area fields that can be indexed. As much as possible, controlled vocabularies should be provided to encourage uniformity, and avoid variations such as "New York City," "NY, NY" "New York" and "Metropolitan New York" (variations provided in the "Organization Metropolitan Area" field.) These fields need to "stand out" in the directory--perhaps identified critical fields for geographic indexing.

Comment from the Feedback Form:

· "On State/Province, you will likely get a lot of entries that are not in the format you prefer. I would have entered GA instead of Georgia had I not read the help pop-up because I was curious about what it said. I believe most people will not read that pop-up because they will not imagine that they need an explanation. You might include text on the entry page that tells them to spell it out."(NB: we expect to provide a controlled vocabulary list at least for US, Canada, Australia and UK, and other countries represented in AMIA)

· "We have at least 3 organizational addresses; form only takes one
think "zip code" is more common parlance for postal code.(NB: Not sure this is true outside the U.S.) Would like a pull down menu for states and provinces. "

Three respondents indicated that these fields did not provide sufficient space.

9. Organization metropolitan area

Issues: As much as possible, controlled vocabularies should be provided to encourage uniformity, and avoid variations such as "New York City," "N.Y., N.Y." "New York" and "Metropolitan New York" (variations provided in the "Organization Metropolitan Area" field.) It is interesting that Rutgers did not list New York as the metropolitan area, although the city is only about 70 miles away, while Fortunoff Archive in New Haven, CT did list New York. We may want to add more specific guidance such as "within 100 miles/160 KM of a prominent city." Getty Images listed several locations--Seattle, Los Angeles, Chicago, Europe, Asia and Latin America. We hadn't intended this as a repeatable field, but it is possible for an organization with several physical offices to list all the offices. Rather than make this field repeatable, I suggest that the instructions tell organizations with multiple offices to list the city of their most prominent, or main, location.

Comments from Feedback Form:

· "Not clear how to fill in Org.Met.Area - give an ex. of the actual entry - e.g. New York" (NB: examples are given in the help screen, but perhaps too far down?)

· "On Organization/Metropolitan area, it is not clear whether members whose "city" entry would be identical to their "metropolitan area" entry should fill out metropolitan area anyway."

10. Administrative telephone number
11. Administrative fax

Issues, 10-11: In general these fields were very straightforward, and most respondents provided both numbers. U.S. respondents remembered to include the "1" for country code about half the time. I am not sure how much this matters?

Comments from Feedback Form:

· "All numbers - tel/fax - should be permanent help line next to field not just choice of clicking to instruct on how to fill in - ie. the country code part... Also to put plus next to all non-US nos."

12. Administrative email

Issues: None

13. Organization homepage URL

Issues: None, except that most respondents do not provide the http:// at the beginning of a URL string but begin directly with www. We might provide the http:// within the response field and let the respondents complete the field from that point forward. One respondent entered "N/A." We need to instruct respondents to leave not applicable fields blank, or else "N/A" will display.

14. Organization catalog URL

Issues: One respondent provided the IP address. Most respondents provided straightforward information. At least one respondent stated "none." It's best for ease of programming that fields are left blank when they are not relevant. It's easier to look for absence of a field than for variations of "none", "N/A", etc. For this reason, it's best that drop-down menus either require a response or offer blank as the default choice, rather than the first item in a list being the "de facto" default choice.

Comments from Feedback Form:

· One respondent indicated this field was confusing but did not explain.

15. Organization type

Issues: There is lack of consistency in the way this field is completed. Archives in academic institutions may respond as archive only, or as archive, library and educational institution. One public broadcasting respondent responded that it was a non-profit organization but did not also select "production company." Maybe one answer is to link the choices to a their entries in an alphabetic glossary that defines all the terms used in the directory. Ultimately, we have to trust the respondent's choices in this area and not second-guess the selections.

Using radio buttons instead of drop down menus so that respondents can see all the options at a glance would help. Also, some respondents had problems with selecting more than one response from a drop down menu. We could never determine if this was a programming error, a problem with the end user's OS (Mac users particularly had problems), respondent's browser, etc. Whenever the selections are not so long that the screen would be too long and cluttered, radio buttons should be used instead of a drop down menu.

Comments from Feedback Form:

· "On Organization Type, some brief definitions might be in order."

· One respondent indicated controlled vocabulary for this field not adequate but did not suggest additional types.

16. Footage and resource licensing

Issues: Use of controlled vocabulary choices seems fairly straightforward. The option "no statement applies" needs to be used to eliminate licensing information from display in union catalog search results, since "no statement applies" will not be meaningful to end users.

Comments from Feedback Form:

· "On Sales versus Licensing, if end users are going to see this, they may need an explanation of how they are differentiated or they will seem to the user to be redundant. This ambiguity is underscored by the fact that the help pop-up "Purchasing Resources from the Organization" in the Sales section actually mentions licensing (NB: this "slipped through" because I copied and pasted similar help screens rather than retype)

17. Contact for licensing footage or resources

Issues: Only observed issue is that one respondent used the term "See below" instead of a name, no doubt referring to the title. This probably will confuse end users, but it's not a common mistake. We need to provide the general rule of thumb to leave fields blank if they don't apply.

18. Title of contact for licensing footage or resources

Issues: No observed issues

19. Licensing service provider URL

Issues: No observed issues except lack of http:// at beginning of URL string.

20. Licensing service provider telephone number
21. Licensing service provider email

Issues, 20-21: No observed issues for the above three fields except that use of the U.S. country dialing code "1" is sporadic, as noted for the administrative telephone number.

22. Licensing of footage or resources

Issues: Some respondents seem to be using the licensing of footage or resources free-text field to describe their collections generally. I think it would be a good idea to offer a free-text field to describe collection strengths generally. Most respondents completing this field seemed to complete it appropriately with specific information about limitations to licensing, third-party licensing contacts and other pertinent information.

23. Sale of resources or resource copies

Issues: No observed issues with this field

24. Contact for purchasing resources

Issues: One respondent, which has no resources for sale, put "N/A" in this and succeeding contact fields. Instructions need to say, if not applicable, leave this field blank, or else "N/A" will display.

One respondent indicated that this field provided insufficient space

25. Title of contact for purchasing resources & resource copies

Issues: One respondent indicated that this field provided insufficient space.

26. Sales service provider URL
27. Sales service provider telephone number
28. Sales service provider email

Issues, 26-28: See note for #24 concerning use of "N/A." U.S. phone numbers rarely include country digit "1", as noted for other telephone fields. Generally, these fields seem pretty straightforward. No one appeared to have problems with them.

Comment from Feedback Form:

· One respondent found this field confusing

29. Purchasing resources from the organization

Issues: No observed issues. Notes provided by respondents were detailed and to the point.

30. Loan or rental of resources and resource copies

Issues: No observed issues

31. Contact for loan or rental services

Issues: No observed issues, other than use of "N/A" by a respondent.

32. Title of contact for loan or rental services

Issues: No observed issues

33. Loan or rental service provider URL
34. Loan or rental service provider telephone number
35. Loan or rental service provider email

Issues, 33-35: No observed issues.

36. Borrowing or renting resources from the organization

Issues: No observed issues. Notes are detailed and understandable and fairly lengthy.

Services provided to the public

Issues: No observed issues. One thing I am wondering. Would it be useful to have another field, Public Exhibition Schedule URL? Do a lot of organizations offer public exhibition schedules on the web? If so, this could be used to create a really appealing component to the public "Education and Outreach" space--find a film-viewing schedule or exhibit by state and city.

Comments from Feedback Form:

· "Services provided to the public: offering advice and guidance to members of the public on archive-related issues, e.g. how best to store their home movies or if another archive does or might hold footage they are looking for."

Services, General:

Even though no issues were observed from the entries, many respondents had concerns about the fields for obtaining resources from the organization. CF General concerns at the end of this document.

37. Audience

Issues: No observed issues except that some respondents may not have selected all that apply, such as one respondent that selected "students" but not "educators." The help screen should emphasize the need to select all that apply. Given that service providers such as footage licensing agencies, preservation labs, etc. are able to participate in the directory, and indeed a search against service providers could be offered on the Archives portal, another category--moving image organizations--probably needs to be added. This category will also work for those organizations that loan materials to other moving image organizations but not to the general public, for example.

Use of radio buttons rather than a drop down menu will make it easier for respondents to study the choices and select multiple responses. Hyperlinks to definitions in a glossary will also be useful.

38. Audience and service description

Issues: Audience and service notes were detailed and specific and fairly lengthy.

From Feedback Form. Directory Fields describing Services:

Comprehensive: 15
Some information is missing: 7

Missing Information:

· "Does not provide for automated online delivery of digitized moving image."

· "Not exactly missing - just very summarised, but enough to indicate the nature of services."

· "I don't think viewing was included."

· "No facility for stating that we operate out of two different locations with different addresses."

· "[Our organization] is a very complex institution and if I had more open fields for text, I could have explained the functions more specifically. "

· "The General Collection and the History of Medicine Division Collection of the National Library of Medicine are two separate and distinct entities. Patrons need to go separate places to gain access to the different collections. "

· "Every field that said select all that apply, only one choice was selectable. (NB: Each time we received this complaint, we checked the form and it was working correctly. We believe this problem did occur but the source of the problem could be at the server or the client end. In particular, Mac clients probably could not use the drop-down menus. ANSWER: Use radio buttons whenever possible instead of drop-down menus.

· "We are interested in providing services commercially for people accessing the directory."

· "We found it challenging to find useful ways to indicate that more than one unit in our archives services researchers with a/v needs. It depends on the types of A/V materials that researchers want to use."

· "Type of access to collections: film viewing (free or paid); screening room and or flatbed."

· "Not necessarily missing but very confusing in the language of "licensing" "loan" or "rental" for collections not in the stock business...they might license and not understand the diff. for renting... "

Suggestions and Comments:

We may need additional fields to indicate service locations, e.g. Number of service locations and Free-text field to explain addresses and different services at different locations. We probably need to add controlled vocabulary values for viewing, in the service list. I am not sure how to address the comment that services are confusing other than through the glossary. I studied all the responses and did not see any indication that respondents didn't understand the terms. End users may not entirely understand the difference. I confess that I don't see a strong distinction between licensing and purchasing, but the organizations responding seemed to understand the difference. We should place a glossary of terms, particularly for services, in the Education and Outreach sections of the general public and science educator's portals.

We should do phone follow-ups with selected respondents to see what additional fields are needed for a large, complex organization and for a commercial provider. We should be very careful about adding fields, however, unless completely necessary. Perhaps a sample directory entry for commercial service providers would be adequate, particularly since the directory is not intended for commercial service providers but should accommodate them.

39. Organization logo
40. Organization image

Issues for 39, 40: The primary issue is to gather sufficient logos and images to develop dynamic web page templates. Only a few organizations sent logos for the web designers to use, although some sent links. We will need to gather additional logos and images.

41. Collection form

Issues: No observable issues. Responses ranged from 1-19, with three respondents selecting 19. One archive with an extensive broadcasting collection listed only "documentary," which is probably a very narrow view of their collection or may reflect a need for additional categories. Adding "scope notes" with examples of the kinds of information or more specific subjects falling under each broad category would be useful. Ultimately, this is the judgment call of each organization. We should consider a free-text "collection form and subject" field to allow organizations to explain their collections, beyond the controlled vocabulary field. We offer this in other areas, such as audience, service and formats collected, but not for collection form and subject. Also, the use of radio buttons rather than drop down menus would also be useful here.

Comment from Feedback form:

· Collection Form. -" the use of "form" is confusing - how about "type" or leaving just as "Collection?"

· "Form does not include specific film genres."

· "Provide definition for "significant."

42. Collection subject

Issues: No real issues observed. Responses are consistent with the organizations, to my knowledge. One collection of Holocaust videos selected only "Society" and not "History" or "Military and defense", which might be expected for the Holocaust. Also, some organizations left this field, and Collection Form blank. If we made these fields required, we would need to exclude service organizations that provide preservation and restoration, etc.

From the Feedback Form:

"The list of subject areas didn't seem very useful for collections like ours; although our collection covers many subject areas, the only applicable term seemed to be "entertainment". Subject area seemed to have too few choices. Provide definition for "significant."

"We were unable to provide a more detailed list of subjects covered in our archive. Subjects were too vague. (NB: Respondent selected only "Society" and not History or Military and defense, which struck me as unusual. We should contact her to ask what general subjects are appropriate to the Holocaust.)

"Recommend adding "Current Affairs" and "Environment"

"Anthropology as a subject choice (we selected Society as an alternate)."

43. Collection size

Issues: No issues observed. The selections seemed consistent with my knowledge of the organizations.

Comments from Feedback form: The Feedback Form identifies this as a problematic field:

"Collection size - these terms are vague and mean different things to different people. Instead of 'small', 'medium' or 'large', how about 'under 1,000 elements', '1,000 to 10,000 elements' '10,000 to 50,000 elements' and 'over 50,000'?"

"In terms of size of collection, actual numbers should be added to categories, to determine meaning of "small", "medium" and "large"

"Reducing size to s, m, or l is hard - everything is relative!

"Collection size help screen just gives the choices small, med, lg -- should include definitions (e.g., med= >5,000, <100,000)."

"The Collection Size Help refers to unit of measure, but the field's controlled choices are only Small, Medium, Large."

"I realize that collection size is a very difficult and subjective concept. Small, med and large was just too vague for me."

"Size is too misleading - most collections have more than 100,000 feet of footage - which is technically a film term anyway... so can we limit this to titles/cans or some other more concrete accounting?"

"We should add the numeric ranges to the choices, perhaps using "elements" as suggested above or drop this field altogether. I'm not sure these numbers are meaningful to the public, anyway. In other primarily text-based union catalogs, there are no indications of size so we would be unique in providing this information. I recommend dropping, and instead encouraging archives to provide information about collection size in a free-text field describing their collections."

44. Collection format

Issues: One respondent listed only "Audio recordings" as a format, but then listed Film and Video media in those fields. There is no way to catch discrepancies like this other than by manual review.

45. Video collection medium
46. Film collection medium

Issues for 45-46: No observed issues. Additional values in "other physical media" to consider including: HDcam; HD 24P; Beta SX; DAT

Comments from Feedback Form:

"Video collection medium: how about listing all the formats mentioned in Sarah Stauderman's identification guide? Again, a user could search the collection for archives, which hold a specific format. Supposing another archive or facilities house acquires the capability to transfer a rare and obsolete format - using this system they could then identify all the archives, which hold tapes in order to make contact."

47. Film base

Issues: No observed issues.

48. Other physical media

Issues: Instead of using this field for unusual film and video sizes, most respondents listed audio formats or supportive textual and photographic material, which is useful information to have. It was clear they did not read the help screen, which said that this field was for unusual or rare film, or video formats. I think the expanded use, for complementary materials, is a better idea, though.

Decision: We are adding controlled vocabulary for complementary media, developed by Ruth Bogan, Rutgers University Libraries, with the assistance of AMIA members.

49. Digital file format

Issues: No observed issues

Directory Fields About Collections:

Comprehensive: 13

Some Information is Missing: 11

Respondent: Formats related to high definition vs. standard definition video. Need to include some of the newer higher-level digital formats distinguishing HD, Super HD from standard definition and lower definition formats.

Respondent: A box for writing a paragraph or two to describe the nature of the collection (e.g. its strengths and weaknesses, or highlighting especially important discrete collections within our holdings) would be useful, I'd have thought.

Respondent: One of our videotape formats is not in the controlled vocabulary - Beta SX. Suggest adding "Environment" and "Current Affairs" to the collection subject list.

Respondent: Would be nice to have a field in which an overview of collections or library(s) contents can be displayed.

Comments and Suggestions: I suggest adding a free-text field to describe collection subject, form and genre strengths. We could encourage organizations to give some indication of size and drop the collection size field.

49. Service day

Issues:

50. Service hour start
51. Service hour end

Issues for 51 & 2: One respondent listed the service hour end as 0000. Many archives used the 12-hour clock, rather than the 24-hour clock, for service hour end. For example, one respondent listed its closing time as 0500 rather than 1700. I am not sure if this matters, or why I wanted the 24-hour clock anyway. I think I was trying to avoid the use of a.m. and p.m., particularly since some organizations will not open until the afternoon. It might be better to just add "a.m." and "p.m." Organizations with 24 hour delivery via the web, such as ResearchChannel listed hours in the following ways: 0000-2300 (ResearchChannel), 0000-0000 Prelinger. This should be addressed via an example in the help screen. Others with a physical location also listed 0000-0000 as their hours. It's not clear why. OTOH, one archive, which is open by appointment, only, also lists 0000-0000. The instructions may need to say that if you are open by appointment only, for scheduled performances only or the hours vary each day, then use the free text field only. See the comment from another respondent, below, concerning hours. My own feeling is that this should be limited to open hours when the organization may be visited or contacted for public service (which can include licensing), followed by administrative or business hours if the organization does not serve the public and should not include 24/7 access to web catalogs, etc.

Comment from Feedback Form:

Respondent: Under "Service Hours", it's not clear which part of the organization they are applicable to - administrative, sales, licensing, or public service. I filled it out for our licensing operation, but other people may have a need to provide service hours for each of the sub-areas of the organization, if they are different. Also, members should be able to specify what time zone their service hours are in. (Time zone is a good idea).

Respondent: Service day time entry was a bit confusing for a site like a TV/Streaming site whose service is available 24x7 whereas business hours are M-F 8-5

NB: During the conference call discussion, we decided to abandon this field altogether. There are so many exceptions and schedule changes that this field can become inaccurate quickly. People wanting to visit an organization should call or check the organization's home page.

52. Exception to service day and hours

Issues: One respondent stated "Federal Holidays" but not "Closed federal holidays." The need to use meaningful sentences or sentence fragments can be added to the help screen, with this used as an example.

See above note--this field will be eliminated.

53. Public service contact title
54. Public service telephone number
55. Public service email

Issues with 54-56: No real issues. Occasionally a respondent provides a real name, but there's not much to be done. I think a "general instructions" document--one page bulleted--that respondents are asked to read before completing the directory can stress that names should be provided only for the MIC Data contact. I did notice that in many cases the email for pub email is a personal email address. There is probably no way to avoid this. Hopefully, if an email bounces, the end user will check for a phone number and call, asking for the appropriate title, e.g. "Reference Librarian."

56. Preservation description

Issues: I've created a separate Preservation_Summary document for Jane to share with the AMIA Preservation Committee for their review, to perhaps develop controlled vocabulary fields. The issues I observed: many people are doing reformatting, particularly from nitrate to safety film. They are also migrating videotapes--to other analog formats and to digital, such as MPEG-2 (CNN). The other major preservation activity is temperature-controlled storage. It seems that these activities could benefit from standardized vocabulary.

Other issues--is preservation performed in-house or outsourced. If in-house, does the respondent provide these services to other organizations and/or to the general public? (The general public is covered in the "audience" data element.)

In the cataloging section, we ask what percentage of the collection is cataloged. Would it be useful to know what percentage of the organization's collection has been reformatted in a more stable medium? What about the percentage of collection that is stored offsite in vaults? Is this useful to know?

From the Feedback Form:

One respondent indicated that this field doesn't provide the right controlled vocabularies but didn't suggest vocabularies.

A. Preservation Practices (12)

Right amount of information: 16
Too Little Information: 6
Too much information:

Missing Fields for Preservation (13):

Respondent: Would like some prompts for type of information to include, to suggest desired level of detail. (I know, we're working on it!!)

Respondent: controlled vocabulary list of preservation activity terms to select from

Respondent: It is not clear if we are talking about preservation practices of specific unit or include the parent organization. E.g. should I describe only what [our unit] does in-house or include the [organization's] conservation lab activities? What if we outsource some conservation treatments?

Respondent: 'Select from the list' fields enabling you to indicate specific preservation activities, e.g. ultrasonic film cleaning, optical printing from 9.5mm to 16mm or maintaining a temperature and humidity controlled vault, would enable those interested in finding out who does what form of preservation to search the database by these activities.

Respondent: Preservation is a very large part of what we do. More space is needed to adequately describe the program.

Respondent: We did not discuss the fact that our archive functions as part of a larger institution, with a collections management and conservation branch, which mandates institutional preservation standards.

Respondent: Each archive is so different and will vary on want they want to share in this area. The most you may be able to hope for is an individual paragraph from each organization. I may have this wrong.

Respondent: What does it mean by "preservation practices" and why is this question being asked--I'm not clear about the purpose, intent

Respondent: Preservation methods, equipment, etc.

Respondent: Perhaps the ability to identify the urgency of necessary preservation might be helpful i.e. "critical condition of nitrate elements mandates urgent attention"

Respondent: A more complex preservation program would probably require more information than allowed

Note: I think at least two fields with perhaps the same controlled vocabularies are needed, for in-house preservation activities and outsourced preservation activities. Addition of these fields is dependent on the AMIA Preservation Committee.

NB: The AMIA Preservation Committee, under the leadership of Ian Gilmour and Hannah Frost, did a tremendous amount of work and created fields to align and balance preservation and cataloging.

58. Preservation manager contact title
59. Preservation manager telephone number
60. Preservation manager email

Issues with 58-60: Same issue as public services contact--mix of personal names and titles, sometimes in the same field, e.g. "Susan Smith, Archivist". One respondent noted, "We have two" in the "Title of Contact" field and then listed two emails ("xxx@aaa.org or zzz@aaa.org") in the email section. I don't think we want to repeat this data element since only one respondent indicated two experts. I think we should ask that even in cases where more than one position manages preservation, that a single position should be identified, which can be based on function or on willingness to serve as a public contact.

Should there be a category that asks if the organization is willing to serve as a mentor/information resource for other moving image organizations (Y/N)? One of the purposes of the directory is to facilitate sharing and collaboration, and this question can help build out "find a mentor" searching in the Outreach and Education space.

61. Cataloging content standard
62. Cataloging metadata schema
63. Cataloging subject heading list
64. Cataloging classification scheme

Issues, 61-64: Some organizations did select "other" for the above questions. Do we want a free-text field to explain cataloging or would this be overkill, given that some respondents feel the directory is too long anyway?

Comment from Feedback Form:

One respondent found the "cataloging metadata schema" field confusing.

One respondent found all cataloging fields confusing.

One respondent recommends adding "FIAF Subject Headings" to the Cataloging subject-heading list

65. Catalog record access

Issues: Some web-accessible catalogs may be access protected (e.g. closed to general public). Do we want to ask if catalogs are publicly available or is that covered by the Catalog URL data element?

Issue from Feedback Form:

Respondent: When cataloguing information is in a variety of formats: shelf lists, card catalogue, finding aids, indexes etc., I found the limitation to one format to be restrictive. I agree. We should change to "check all that apply."

66. Percentage of collection cataloged
67. Percentage of collection cataloged online

Issues, 66-67:

Comment from Feedback form on 66:

Respondent: I felt that "more than half" didn't quite do justice to our achievements in cataloguing, but I couldn't honestly select 100%.

68. Cataloging level

Comment from Feedback Form:

Respondent: On "Cataloging Level", you might want to provide some definitions for people who don't use that kind of terminology in their organization and for end user benefit as well.

69. Cataloging manager contact title
70. Cataloging manager telephone number
71. Cataloging manager email

Issues with 69-71: As with the preservation manager, do we want to ask if the contact is willing to serve as an information resource/mentor? We do mention in the help screens that the information will be made available via the portal, but many people do not read the help screens unless they need them.

From the Feedback Form:

Cataloging Practices (14):

Right amount of information: 20
Too little information: 2
Too much information: 1

Missing Fields for Cataloging (15):

Respondent: Nothing missing. Our cataloging effort is a work in progress so this information could change over time.

Respondent: Add "FIAF Subject Headings" to list of Cataloging Subhead list. It would be useful to define acronyms (include definitions in the help screens for the appropriate fields perhaps).

Respondent: Might be useful to ask members to list any cataloging-related groups/associations they participate in.

Respondent: Did not allow us to provide information to describe our digital indexing system. Did not allow us to provide adequate information on in-house database structure and standards.

Respondent: I can't answer as I didn't understand the terms-- if other orgs do not have a REAL cataloger they may also experience the same problem

72. Z39.50 compliant catalog
73. OAI data mining flag

Issues with 72-73: No observable issues

Comment from feedback Form:
One respondent found these fields confusing
One respondent found OAI flag confusing and commented: I know what OAI is, we just don't know if our organization's OPAC is compliant

74. MIC database contact
75. MIC database contact title
76. MIC database contact telephone number
77. MIC database contact email

Issues with 74-77: The only issue is that a few respondents did not complete these fields, and these fields are required.

Other Issues:

B. Required fields: Which fields should be required in order to submit the directory entry? MIC database contact, phone number and email are required. Organization title should also be required. Are there any others that are required? I think the entry should be completed in full (all relevant fields) if you are loading data into the MIC. There will be contact between the MIC administrator and the MIC Data Contact for the organization, so the coordinator can evaluate the directory form and work through any issues at that point.

C. Time Required

# of Respondents Time Needed Acceptable or Too Long Preferred Time
3 10 min acceptable
4 20 min acceptable
2 25 min acceptable
5 30 min acceptable
2 40 min acceptable
3 1 hr acceptable
1 1 hr 30 min acceptable
1 2 hrs acceptable
15 min Too long 5 min
15 min Too long 10 min
30 min Too Long 15 min
1 hr Too long 30 min
1 hr Too long 45 min
1 hr Too long 30 min

Acceptable: 21
Too Long: 6
Avg Time to complete: 38 min.
Time most cited: 30 min (6); 60 min (6)

Suggestion: We should note that the survey takes between 30 and 60 minutes to complete. It appears to be an acceptable length, but we should be very cautious about making it any longer.

D. Need Assistance from Others? If so, why
NB: If a respondent said "no" but indicated that others were consulted, it was counted as a "yes"

Respondents needing assistance: 25

Did not need assistance: 3

Explanations:

I needed to check with the Film Collection Curator regarding licensing, loans, and preservation sections, particularly the wording of the free text sections

I work in [X] Division of [my organization]. While I have contact with the Preservation and Cataloging sections, I don't know people in Collection Access and ILL. Also, I was not familiar with some of the cataloging and metadata terms.

As we have no cataloger, the cataloging terms at the end were, for the most part, mysterious

I needed to find contact info.

I had to contact staff in the preservation, reference and records management/cataloging sections to adequately complete this information.

Didn't know if catalog was Z39.50 compliant

Probably would have had to check with various people about cat./preservation/coll. size

Required contacting persons responsible for areas of service. I did this ahead of filling out the form.

Suggestion: In the general instructions, we should note that the directory information includes public services, licensing, loans and sales, preservation and cataloging activities. We should recommend that they print the form before completion and contact the appropriate persons for information. We should have a print-friendly form that displays all the choices.

We should include a glossary with brief definitions, particularly for cataloging terms. This glossary can be strictly alphabetical or broken down by category (Cataloging, Physical Format, etc.) I recommend strictly alphabetical.

Question: Should we allow folks to fill in the print-friendly form and mail to the Database coordinator for data entry? If so, who will do the data entry?

E. Ease of Use:

Very easy to complete: 11
Somewhat easy to complete: 11
Difficult to complete: 4

Respondent - See my email about de-selecting "Select all that apply" Other than that once you get the hang of it it's ok but still hard to read - any way of making the pull-down boxes bigger - so it's more pages....(only if the Back/Continue bug is fixed!) . Also need permanent visible help line to tell you to hold down Ctrl. and click on all apply - you give the line on the top of this form - I think it's necessary here and when a "select" field -confusing with field label without further clarification on screen (see above comments)

Respondent: The drop-down menus do not work on a Macintosh running IE5. Please let me know how I can provide missing information and correct over generalized or incomplete entries (short of installing a buggy browser) :)

Respondent: I'm using a Mac - I couldn't select more than one on a list unless they were adjacent - can you use tick boxes or buttons for these?

Respondent: I didn't understand how to use the pull down menu for multiple selections.

Respondent: At the top of this input form, where it says "print off the directory form" it would be nice to have a link to the directory form, or better yet, a button that prints the whole input form with one command. Otherwise, you have to go back to the input form URL, and keep sending print commands five times, no?

Comments and suggestions: Most found the form easy or somewhat easy to complete. Those that had problems didn't seem to have problems with the information but with form navigation, particularly drop down menus and particularly for Macs. It's important to realize this was a Q&D programming effort, when we realized the pre-test required a web form. The final database and web form will be extensively tested, on all platforms, by the University of Washington, and will include more functionality than we could provide in the few days available for preparing the pre-test. We also can add the instruction about holding down the Cntrl key at the bottom or top of each page, instead of just at the beginning.

F. General information about organizations:

Service Right amount of Info Too Little Info Too Much Info
Identify organization as unique entity 20 4
Providing a dynamic web page 21 3 2
Pre-selecting organizations for searching 20 4

Comments:

Respondent: I'm not sure that I noticed a freeform text field for organizations to describe their mission or activities in "idiosyncratic" form.

Respondent: It appears that you are including commercial stock footage houses and much of the information that you ask for does not relate. The information requested relates to non-commercial libraries.

G. Obtaining Resources - Agree or Disagree with categories:

Agree: 16

Disagree: 11

Comments:

Respondent: Maybe not enough categories. Maybe some organizations allow onsite use or copying.

Respondent: Not necessarily missing but very confusing in the language of "licensing" "loan" or "rental" for collections not in the stock business...they might license and not understand the diff. for renting... also - purchase of resources or resource copies is confusing - by purch. of "resources" do you mean duplication services, etc.?

Respondent: There should be an easy way for an organization that has all three functions in the same department to indicate that without inputting the information 3 times.

Respondent: Only disagree by making the point that these functions may be provided by the same contact. Result is entering redundant information.

Respondent: There should be an intermediate category for access in terms of researchers being able to view materials onsite at the archive. This is one of the principal services we offer. By focusing specifically on licensing and purchase, the MIC serves stock footage houses but not cultural or research institutions.

Respondent: Should include a way to designate free, downloadable resources.

Respondent: Those are OK as far as they go, but our major service is onsite, individual viewing. Another valuable service is the availability of related print materials (books, periodicals) and "documentation" (stills, posters, scripts, etc.), also for onsite research.

Respondent: Think you may need an option for "unavailable". Some resources may also have multiple categories apply to them, depending on circumstances. Example: a CNN program could be available both for personal use sale and for licensing. Note: We can only provide information at the organization and not at the individual item level.

Respondent: This is fairly difficult to answer, as our users can obtain resources from us in more than the above three categories. We consider ourselves a repository, and house reference copies of materials from various international and national archives. We make this material available, even though we do not own the rights. Our organization licenses material that we own. In addition, users can obtain material within our collection that we do not own, by contacting the rights holder. We will provide that information on a case-by-case basis. Also, we do not sell or loan or rent our material, but we do allow users to view video and/or film reference copies on-site.

Respondent: Research is not listed as an option and folks want all of the above and research information.

Respondent: Add a category for onsite viewing at the repository for collections that provide access, may provide duplication services for publication/ broadcast but do not 'sell' or loan.

Comments and Suggestions: This area needs some work. I noticed the redundancy, but am not sure how to address it. We can't use inheritance (e.g. leave blank if the contact information is the same as the previous entry) because the blank may indicate "not applicable" instead. Perhaps we should call the section "access" and include commercial licensing; duplication and copy purchases; rental or loan; and onsite viewing and research. Also, perhaps we could have a general access contact info person and have the respondents complete specific contact info in each category only if the general access contact is not the correct contact.

Method of Obtaining Resources Adequate Not Adequate
Licensing 24 2
Purchase 26 1
Loan or rental 25 1

Comments:

Respondent: please put some help permanently on the screen next to the fields - to aid the user - i.e. "Licensing - specific use for a fee of seconds/minutes/shots" - of course better written! "Loan or Rental - distribution of complete works" Comment: I personally think definitions on the form itself would be too much but I do agree that a Glossary is needed. The nice thing about a separate glossary is that it could be linked from each Education and Outreach section. Also, it would be great if terms in the glossary were hyperlinked to their definitions, wherever they appear. A "glossary" button could appear at the top or bottom of each page, or a running explanation "confused about terms? Each term is hyperlinked to a glossary definition or a help screen." It was clear that some respondents did not realize that the data elements were hyperlinked to help screens.

Respondent: See the description for #10. We can provide contact information for third-party organizations on a case-by-case basis.

H. Directory Help

Help Screens (21):

Very Useful: 21
Somewhat useful: 6
Not useful:

Problem Help Screens (22):

Respondent: "I would have preferred more specific examples in the help screens."

Respondent - What help screens?

Respondent- This was a great idea. I liked them.

Respondent: They need to be shorter with examples visible right away on your first screen and in some cases should be on the data entry screen without having to choose to pop up.

Respondent: Help screens work well for defining data element, but sometimes you need definitions for the terms in the pull-down menus. Would it be possible to right-click to get a help screen for those?

User Guide (23):

Very Useful: 11
Somewhat Useful: 13
Not useful: 4

Sample Entry (24):

Very useful: 14
Somewhat useful: 7
Not useful: 4

25.

Most Useful Useful Least useful
Help Screen 22 2
Printable User's Guide 5 8 11
Sample Entry 11 12 3

Contact for assistance (26):

Very important: 16
Somewhat important: 7
Not important: 2

Notes and Comments: The help screens and a glossary of terms are most useful. It would be terrific if all terms in the glossary could be hyperlinked to their definitions, regardless of where they appear--in the field or in a help screen or in general instructions. If time permits, a sample entry would be useful. A printable users' guide appears to be overkill. A contact with phone number and email is needed.

Other comments:

Respondent: Indicate required fields. Perhaps some of the multi-select lists could be check boxes for easier inputting of information. Submission of data failed.
The shorter controlled vocabulary fields (10 options or less) should all be checkboxes. A lot of folks had trouble with dropdown menus.

Respondent: A generalized comment: At the moment this is an opt-in project. It may be helpful to make the questionnaire and directory friendlier for organizations or custodial units that do not direct their energy towards serving members of the public. It's possible there might be gradations of visibility for certain collections. This was a trap we encountered during the Footage 89/91 compilation process. Many collections need to be included in directories that reach others in the field but not necessarily the public. Please excuse me if I overlooked this while filling the Q out. Thanks! I don't quite understand this comment, or how to address it. I'll defer to someone else on this issue.

Respondent: In general, I found it well-designed and relatively easy to fill out.

Decisions

· Approximately 10 "general guidelines" will be provided to assist people in completing the directory. They will explain how to locate help screens and glossary terms.
· An alphabetic glossary will be developed for terms, to appear in the archives E&O section and also hyperlinked directly from the directory.
· Definitions of organization types and subjects will be provided and hyperlinked from the search screen that allows users to "pre-filter" by broad subject category. This will assist organizations in accurately completing the directory and end users in using these fields to "pre-filter" archives.
· Help screens will be written to be much shorter with examples at the top, followed by explanations.
· A sample directory form for an organization that serves the public and for an organization that markets to or only serves moving image archives, will be provided if there is time.
· An overview of the cataloging process, highlighting the cataloging data elements (one page) will be provided.
· An overview of film and video preservation, highlighting the preservation data elements, will be provided.
· Whenever possible, radio buttons will be used instead of drop-down menus.
· Obtaining resources from the organization will be streamlined.
· Preservation will be expanded to more closely parallel cataloging.