Monday, November 22, 1999

9:00am - 4:00pm

Texas State Library and Archives Commission

Austin, TX


Home | Implementation Resources


Cathy Hartman, University of North Texas

Bill Moen, University of North Texas

Virginia Allen, Lamar University

Teresa Ashley, Austin Community College

Sheila Williams, Euless Public Library

Saralyn Shone, Arlington Public Library

Tim Judkins, University of Texas, Southwest Medical Library

Grete Pasch, Texas State Library and Archives Commission

Shelly Almgren, Texas Wesleyan University

Christine Peterson, Texas State Library and Archives Commission

Sharon Castleberry, Carrollton Public Library

Caroline Geer, Le Tourneau University

Richard Wilson, Auto-Graphics

Slavko Manojlovich, SIRSI


Draft Release 2.0 of Z Texas Profile

  • Bath Profile released for comment in
    • UK Meeting to be held soon that will discuss further comments on Bath Profile
    • Comments provided thus far concern:  SUTRS and GRS requirements, lack of clarity in purpose, suggestions for fine-tuning, attribute value changes, typographical errors
  • Z Texas Relationship to Bath Profile
    • We could refer Texas librarians to the Bath Profile levels
    • We could include Bath language in Z Texas Profile (preferred)
    • Z Texas can become a superset of Bath -- Bath as basic; Z Texas would had additional functionality
  • Specifics on changing Z Texas to align with Bath
    • SUTRS at level 0 -- this requirement currently makes Z Texas Profile not conformant to Bath
      • Possibly make SUTRS a client requirement; servers deal only with MARC
      • SUTRS requirement means that whatever the server sends (can be formatted or not) is displayed with no modification on client end
      • Straw vote -- question whether we prefer to have a Z Texas Profile that we cannot comply to (because it requires SUTRS) or do we prefer to have Z Texas Profile be the Bath Profile minus the SUTRS requirement? Majority would prefer to have Z Texas Profile be the Bath Profile minue SUTRS
      • Like the idea of having client deal with both MARC 21 and UNIMARC -- one research library consortium in UK will output only SUTRS -- they could possibly output a pseudo-MARC like OCLC (without important indicators/sub-fields); if consortium decides to stay with SUTRS, then we could like a list of those libraries whose catalogs we will not be able to search unless we have clients that can deal with SUTRS
      • Requirement:  Be sure the MARC 21 servers support the MARC 21 character set
    • Aligning searching with Bath; went through September minutes to look at differences in search capabilities
      • Made some changes in attributes to ask Bath to consider
        • Standard Identifier Search -- ask that the Structure attribute be changed to 1/phrase because some identifiers have spaces in them, thereby no providing satisfactory results if 2/word is used
        • Standard Identifier Search -- ask that the Completness attribute be changed to 1/incomplete subfield because there are revision/modification phrases tacked onto the end of LCCNs and ISBNs
        • Standard Identifer Search -- Use attribute 50 is SuDoc number, so should this should be called out in the call number/classification search, not here; could not find a use attribute for GPO item number for this search; this information is normally found in the 074 |a.
        • Date of Publication Search -- ask that the Completeness attribute be changed to 1/incomplete subfield as you might be searching the 260 |c, which can have other information after the date
      • Date of Publication and Standard Identifier will become Z Texas Category 1 searches in order to come into compliance with Bath
      • Call Number/Classification Searches
        • Should we create multiple searches, one for each specific class scheme?   Should we create a single search for a generic call number and/or class number?
        • Decided to ask for separate searches for Dewey, LC, NLM, SuDocs, TX Doc Number and also a combined search -- first in field, phrase, incomplete subfield, right truncation
      • Bath Level  0 and 1 would equal the first level of Z Texas.  Z Texas would change its numbering system to reflect the Bath two levels.  Z Texas level 2 could be conditional, based on what you support in your library, e.g., if you use Dewey, you wouldn't provide NLM searching
        • Clarification -- Z Texas would have 4 levels:  Level 0 -- basic end user searching, including normalized author, keyword title, keyword subject, keyword; Level 1 -- a little more advanced search, including specific types of author, title and subject searches, Date of Publication and Standard Number searching; Level 2 -- Z Texas requirements such as local control number, specific standard number searching, call number searching, controlled vocabulary, format, language, keyword searches; Level 3 -- highly specific searching to include publisher name, acquisition date, form/genre, and function

Levels 2 and 3 Searching Requirements/Other Requirements (Dublin Core)

  • Level 3 Requirements
    • Problem with Form/Genre and Function -- need to create a use attribute semantic other than subject (although they are found in the 655 and 657 fields); archives use these two fields, but public libraries could also use Form/Genre (love stories, Christian fiction) quite a bit; both searches could easily be used as stand-alone searches as well as qualifying searches
      • Ask ZIG if they know of use attribute that can be used for 655 |a and 657 |a -- if not, then ask for new one
      • Shelley Almgren and Chris Peterson will provide more detail on these two fields before the next meeting
    • Future possibilities:  Place of publication, formatted contents notes, URL?
  • TRAIL/Dublin Core/Allen Mullen -- TSLAC
    • E-Book standard includes Dublin Core tags; HTML tags also use Dublin Core
    • TRAIL (http://www2.tsl.texas.gov/trail) uses meta tags that include some Dublin Core tags; Allen will be looking at harvesting these tags automatically
    • TRAIL uses Dublin Core and Bib-1 attribute set already; ready to incorporate Z39.50; can send many types of retrieval records (MARC, SUTRS, GILS, XML, etc.); should libraries able to get a brief record or full record or both?  Prefer to have TRAIL always send full record; leave it to client to decide what it wants to see
    • Allen -- configure TRAIL for Z Texas functional area A/levels 0 and 1; export MARC 21 format by April 2000; possibility of having testbed available for January meeting

MARC Mapping/Indexing Guidance

  • Use two UNT students will serve as organizers so a serious look can be made at the tags used in Z Texas

Z Client Update/Bob Gaines/Interoperability Testing

  • Ready to start testing, but no servers as yet; hope to remedy this soon

TLA Programs

  • Z Texas:  Will It Fly? -- Wednesday, 12:00pm - 2:50pm
    • Change to dealing with problems you may encounter in implementing Z Texas
    • Possible speakers -- Slavko (who has tried implementing in SIRSI), Bill (who is implementing on a free server), Bob (client side implementation issues), Scott (indexing issues)
  • Sheila Williams/Bill Moen program
    • Update on profile/where are we/what are we doing
    • Basic Metadata

Strategy for Adoption/Timelines

  • Release of Z Texas version 2.0 -- release to Texas people in the next couple of weeks with caveat that Bath specs will be dealt with in January meeting
  • Contact:
    • Forest Trails consortium, Public Library Administrators of North Texas, Techies (technical services libns in Metroplex),   Amigos (Spring meeting, May 3-5), TexShare (link from their page to Z Texas?), ARL libraries, UT, A&M, Rice, HPL, Dallas PL (Connie Moss), TX Tech
  • List of Texas Z Servers -- be sure include whether they support Z Texas profile or not
  • Change or add PPT presentation on web site that Virginia Allen did
  • Online demo -- why would you want Z39.50 for technical services librarians?  ILL? catalogers?
  • Bob's letter to automation vendors
    • Illinois also interested in having letter sent to vendors; maybe co-write a letter

ZIG Meeting/San Antonio/Logistics

  • 1/18/00 -- Bill's Z39.50 workshop (sponsored by TZIG and NISO )
  • 1/19/00 -- Overview ZIG Sessions/San Antonio Public Library Auditorium
  • 1/20/99 -- Bath/Z Texas Meeting; ILL WG; Mozilla WG; BIB-2 Attribute WG/Various locations
  • 1/21/00 -- Plenary ZIG Meeting/San Antonio Public Library Auditorium
  • Break Financial Support -- 70 people -- ask their vendors for support -- get approximate costs


  • Central depository of archival records using EAD; ultimately will try to get these records behind a Z39.50 server -- Bill will be contacting others for more information

To Do:

  • Need a use attribute for GPO Item Number -- 074 |a -- Bill Moen
  • Need a use attribute for Form/Genre -- 655 |a -- Bill Moen
  • Need a use attribute for Function -- 657 |a -- Bill Moen
  • More detail on 655 and 657 -- Shelley Almgren and Chris Peterson
  • TRAIL configured to Z Texas levels 0 and 1 -- Allen Mullen
  • MARC mapping/indexing guidance -- UNT class/Bill Moen
  • Z Client -- Bob Gaines -- on-going
  • Z Texas:  Will It Fly?  -- TLA program , speakers -- Chris Peterson
  • Contacting other groups in the state -- Bill Moen will coordinate
  • ZIG meeting in San Antonio after ALA Midwinter
  • Talk to your vendors about supporting a break or two during ZIG meeting
  • Contact EAD people -- Bill Moen

Next Z Texas meeting -- to be held with Bath Profile group on January 20th at San Antonio Public Library Auditorium, 9:00am - 4:00pm

Thanks to everyone who came to the meeting during Thanksgiving week!  Many of you had long drives and we really appreciate the time and expense you put forward when you come!

Return to Z39.50 Home

Page last modified: April 29, 2014