 |
 |
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.