 |
 |
I am sorry, I should not have said asserted, as I did, that "BISG sees libraries as competition and will not do anything to help them". Its the publishers who control BISG who would, in my opinion, not shed a tear were the last public library to close its doors. Your mileage may differ. Cary On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 10:01 AM, Nettie Lagace <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > hi Christina, > > I am your friendly neighborhood standards person at NISO. There are also > several people who are active in NISO who are also active in Code4Lib, and > we are always looking for more! I read Code4Lib when I can and attend the > conference when I can (sad to say that my proposals are never voted in… oh > standards…) > > re RFID: most of the action is now going on at the international level > within ISO and TC46 (the ISO committee that handles information and > documentation). There is a working group within TC46, WG11, which handles > ISO 28560, RFID in Libraries. Revisions and new proposals for extensions to > the standard happen here. The Danes are currently serving as the > secretariat for this WG: http://biblstandard.dk/rfid/ NISO represents > the US to TC46 (ANSI is actually the ISO member but appoints NISO for this > particular role). Hence we appoint the US representatives to the WG and > handle communication of the US voting position for any changes that need to > be approved at the TC46 level. I would be happy to coordinate any further > questions you might have. > > I should also say that I disagree that BISG is anti-libraries, as another > commenter opined. However, it’s true that libraries are not its primary > constituency. NISO is a strong industry partner with BISG on > cross-industry standards and communication, and we work together on many > initiatives to make sure that requirements and perspectives from each group > re metadata, business practices, etc. are shared as much as possible. > > Cheers, > Nettie > ---------------------- > Nettie Lagace > Associate Director for Programs > National Information Standards Organization (NISO) > 3600 Clipper Mill Road, Suite 302 > Baltimore, MD 21211 > Mobile: 617-863-0501 > Fax: 410-685-5278 > E-mail: [log in to unmask] > > > On Oct 7, 2014, at 2:17 PM, Salazar, Christina < > [log in to unmask]> wrote: > > > OH NO! (shudder) I’m pretty sure no one is suggesting a "formalized c4l" > AGAIN - we've been there done that, relatively recently too. > > > > I think what we're talking about is a way to represent c4l interests in > standards making bodies. > > > > And just for my own edification, if you're saying c4l IS represented in > standards making bodies, please tell me who do I talk to? For instance on > the RFID thing, who can I talk to in order to find out HOW and IF this > conversation is happening with American standards making bodies? > > > > Or do you mean INDIVIDUALS who participate in c4l are represented in > standards making bodies? > > > > Christina > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of > Francis Kayiwa > > Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2014 11:07 AM > > To: [log in to unmask] > > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Forwarding blog post: Apple, Android and NFC – > how should libraries prepare? (RFID stuffs) > > > > On 10/07/2014 02:03 PM, Cary Gordon wrote: > > > > > > > > NISO (and LITA, ASIS&T, > >> etc.) are quite well represented on this list, and I don't believe > >> that a formalized c4l would give us any more say in standards that we > have already. > > > > +1 > > > > > > ./fxk > > > > > > -- > > You single-handedly fought your way into this hopeless mess. > -- Cary Gordon The Cherry Hill Company http://chillco.com