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