SUMMARY OF DISCUSSIONS TO DATE AND PROPOSED NEXT STEPS

· The "Stakeholders/Partners" discussions (4.13 & 3.15.2000) confirm that the UCSD campus (including individual faculty, academic departments, administration, and SDSC) is both our primary stakeholder and our primary partner. The campus is followed in turn by the San Diego community, CDL, and a host of others in declining order of priority.

· The spectrum of possibilities identified in the "If Money Were No Object" discussion (3.1.2000) confirms that the question is not whether to carry out (a) concerted digital library initiative(s) but, rather, which initiative(s) to carry out first. Further, the exercise confirms that there are (at least) two axes along which we could carry out such (an) initiatives(s), as follows:

services (S)

instruction (I) research (R)

collections (C)

Our challenge is to initiate or further develop activities that transpire along both of these axes.

· Our discussion (2.2.2000) of the assumptions upon which we thought our digital library (DL) initiatives should be based confirmed that:

o DL development priorities should be driven by the needs/interests of our primary clientele

o primary emphasis in DL development should be promoting access

o DL development should complement but not duplicate CDL efforts

o DL initiatives should reflect who we are as a campus and a community

o DL development should be opportunistic (in the best sense of the word)

· So, in my mind our discussions to date argue for our proceeding at this point with the following DL initiatives:

o Portal (S-C-I-R)

o E-reserves (S-I)

· DARP (S-I-R?)

· DIR (S-I-R?)

o Avanti (S-I-R)

o Pacific Rim-oriented, SIO-based (but including content from other collections (e.g., MLSC) as appropriate) content creation project with an oceanography focus (C-I-R)

o open archive (in oceanography or related field/subfield?) as possible long-term objective (S-C-R)

· General observations:

o Our DL "first steps" should be recognized for what they are: a place to start, not a place to end up.

o We need to be prepared to "fail forward."

o In suggesting Portal, E-reserves, and Avanti I am mindful of our successes to date, the campus appetite for more of what is perceived to be a good thing, and Dave Miller's IT funds as a possible source of funds.

o Generally, in suggesting a Pacific Rim-oriented content creation project I am mindful of who we are, where we are, and the value of defining a niche predicated on both.

o In suggesting an SIO-based content creation project, I am mindful of Charlie Kennel as a powerful political ally and of SIO as a powerful extramural funding partner. While all first steps are local (i.e., campus-oriented), I am also mindful of the potential appeal of an SIO-based initiative to possible partners in the greater San Diego community.

o In suggesting the possible desirability of developing (an) open archive(s), I am mindful of CDL's

e-scholarship ambitions and the likely advantages (political, financial, etc.) of aligning ourselves with those.