Skip to content
Penn State University Libraries
University Library Home
 

Department of Commerce Digitization Repository Project

About this Project

Project Title: Registry of Digitized Publications of the Department of Commerce

Project Description: The purpose of this project is to develop a comprehensive registry of legacy publications from the Department of Commerce that have been digitized by the library community. The registry will include a piece-level inventory of publications that have and have not been digitized.

How is the site organized? A link to a working Excel file containing all of the records from each sub-agency will be available in the University Libraries' repository ScholarSphere. Updates to these files will be recorded on the site in the field Date Modified.

How are the files organized? Each file contains 17 fields:

  • Title. The titles are not “exact” at this time, but should be enough to determine whether the corresponding piece matches. They correspond with the first title field of the corresponding OCLC records or the title field in the HathiTrust catalog record.

  • SUDOC Number. OCLC records that had corresponding SUDOC numbers were used. If the record did not have a SUDOC number the item was evaluated to determine its classification.

  • OCLC Number. Cataloging records from OCLC can be obtained using the corresponding OCLC accession number.

  • OCLC Number (alternative). This was included to provide for duplicate catalog for a particular item. This can sometimes include more than one number.

  • SUDOCSORT. Allows the user to sort the file by SUDOC number.

  • Series. Actually this is the SUDOC classification series statement. A record in Green was included so that information about earlier and later SUDOC classification could be included.

  • GPO PURL. These are persistent URLs used by the Government Printing Office to link to electronic copies. They have not all been verified as working.

  • Hathi Catalog Record. This is the record in HathiTrust that has all of the meta-data about the corresponding title. The catalog record may have many titles attached to a single record.

  • Major Agency. Since this is a registry for the Department of Commerce, all titles are part of that agency. It was included in anticipation that other agencies would be considered in the future.

  • Sub Agency. The sub agency is under the auspices of the corresponding major agency.

  • UNIQUE in CIC. This field is oftentimes misleading because there is a duplicate cataloging record with another OCLC number.

  • PUB DATE. Date when the publication was published.

  • 945 FIELD. Libraries in the Committee on Institutional Cooperation (CIC) that claim to own that particular item.

  • 945 FIELD (alternative). Libraries in the Committee on Institutional Cooperation (CIC) that claim to own that particular item. This corresponds to the alternative OCLC number.

  • NOTES. Used to help track information about the piece.

  • FEDERAL AGENCY URL. Used to track the URL of federal digital copies of a piece.

  • Haithi Unique URL. This is the unique link to the file for that piece.

Back to top

Agencies, alphabetically

Back to top

SuDocs Classification

Back to top

Original Project Proposal

Proposal for Sabbatocal Leave

Stephen Woods, University Libraries
Rank: Associate Librarian
Title: Social Sciences Librarian
Specialties: Sociology, Crime & Justice, Government Information, Social Science Data
Length of Leave: March 1 – August 31, 2012

Sabbatical Project: Develop a systematic approach for creating a comprehensive digital collection of legacy publications from the Department of Commerce.

Background: The University Libraries was designated a Federal Depository Library in July 16, 1858. When authority for the program was transferred from the Department of Interior to the Government Printing Office (GPO) in 1895 the collection was recognized as one of the distinguished depository collections. Along with many of the older depository collections it became part of the foundation for a group of collections that make up the Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP) a program that was formalized in the Depository Library Act of 1962.

Important changes to the FDLP occurred in the 1990s particularly in the format that federal government information was being distributed. GPO was encouraged by Congress to create electronic tools to distribute (PL 103-40 June 8, 1993) information and they were also being asked to reduce paper (OMB Circular A-130). In response, GPO created GPO Access and later FDSYS tools that are very effective for a set of publications that focus primarily on the process of making law.

The E-Government Act of 2002 spawned new challenges as federal agencies mounted their publication creating the growth of “born digital” publications. GPO responded to this phenomena by creating PURL links in their catalog records, a complete change in the tangible distributive model that was part historical FLDP. 2009 estimates are that 97% of the material disseminated by GPO to the depository libraries had an online link.

Libraries across the country loaded these records in their catalogs and search engines like Google and Yahoo indexed these publications creating the illusion that all government information was available electronically. However, hidden in their stacks were tangible legacy collections that were not even cataloged let alone available in digital format. Access and discoverability were left to the resourceful few who were not only aware of the collections, but also knew how to use them.

The last four years for legacy documents collections have been epitomized through large digitization projects. The very earliest collection of depository material, the American State Papers and the Serial Set, were digitized by vendors and sold at inordinate prices back to the research library community. Google’s book digitization project also pulled in a huge number of documents from the legacy collection. The Google digitization project had some problems related with the way that it approached the legacy documents collection primarily associated with the way it handled copyright restrictions. However, three positive initiatives occurred as a result of the Google project that directly related to this sabbatical proposal. First, in order to send legacy documents material to Google they needed to be cataloged. Second, the creation of HathiTrust as a digital repository allowed the CIC to circumvent the copyright restrictions that Google had placed on the federal documents that had been scanned. Third, the CIC government documents community finally had an infrastructure for digitizing and cataloging a legacy collectioni.

It was within this context that the University Libraries began an initiative to digitize all of the legacy publications of the Department of Commerce. This has required a great deal of coordination not only within the University Libraries, but with the CIC as well as with the State Library. It is the intention that at the end of the project three outcomes will be available for the research community:

  • National Bibliography for the Department of Commerce
  • Digital Legacy collection of the Department of Commerce
  • Complete tangible collection that replicates the digital collection

It will be housed at the University of Minnesota and the State Library of Pennsylvania which is our FDLP regional library (this is required by current law).

Details of sabbatical project: research proposal

As previously stated, this sabbatical project will focus on developing a systematic approach for improving access and discoverability by digitizing legacy publications from the Department of Commerce. It will be designed to address three themes that are the hallmark of librarianship: systematic organization, access, and preservation.

Developing a National Bibliography for Department of Commerce

The principle challenge for digitizing a comprehensive collection of a federal agency has always been the creation of a tool that will allow us to maintain a systematic inventory. Google’s mass digitization project and other localized digital project provide inadequate ways to determine what has been digitized as well as what still needs to be digitized. In sum, a National Bibliography does not currently exist so it is impossible coordinate digitization effortsii.

For this sabbatical project I will be working with a set of 61,313 records that were obtained by the CIC from OCLCiii. This set of records is by no means comprehensive, but provide an excellent foundation for beginning to creating a piece level national bibliography for the Department of Commerce. However, the University of Minnesota and our own cataloging department have been aggressively cataloging their legacy collections.

My 15 years as a specialist in government information provides me with the prerequisite skills and knowledge of indexing resources to analyze these records and to begin creating a piece level inventory for a national bibliography for the Department of Commerce. As part of the sabbatical project I will develop collaborations with the librarians at the Department of Commerce and it subsidiary agencies such as: Bureau of Census, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Institutes of Standards and Technology, and the Bureau of Economic Affairs.

The benefits include:

  • Research community will be able to inventory their collection to determine comprehensiveness
  • Research community will be able to identify a set of OCLC record numbers if they decide to retrospectively catalog their Department of Commerce collection.

Developing a Digitized Legacy Collection

Creating an effective piece level inventory tool will allow us to systematically identify what has already been digitized and whether or not it resides in a trust repository. This will allow us to focus on digitizing materials that have not been digitized and pulling digital content into HathiTrust digital legacy material that is not on a stable site.

Consequently, this sabbatical project will also need to focus on developing a systematic approach for identifying material to be digitized as well as developing a workable process for updating a piece level National Bibliography. The benefits include:

  • Research community will be able to identify a set of records with links to digital copies
  • Libraries can weed their collections to free much need space. Decisions can be made to keep tangible copies of materials that are useful in both digital and tangible format.
  • Research community will be able to create links between digital content organizing them in pathfinders or other meaningful structures.

Preserving a tangible comprehensive collection

In order to get the best digital product it will be necessary to do destructive scanning on much of the material. Consequently, we will want to make sure that a tangible copy of the material is available in the future. We will be working be working with the University of Minnesota and the State Library of Pennsylvania to make sure that they own a comprehensive collection. This holdings information will be recorded in the National Bibliography. Benefits include:

  • Development of a comprehensive collection. Currently there is no way to know what is missing from collections around the country.
  • Provides opportunity to create digital content with future technology.
  • Preserves a collection in case there are problems with the digital version (i.e. quality of scanning)

Outcomes, benefits, and deliverables

In the long run, a comprehensive National Bibliography, a digital collection, and comprehensive tangible collection are the most important outcomes and deliverables.

For my sabbatical, there will be many opportunities to write and present on the model that we are developing for creating a digital collection for the Department of Commerce. It is our intention that other research libraries utilize this model for other agencies. I will be working closely with colleagues from the Association of Southeastern Research Libraries who are beginning to envision new models for the FDLP around Communities of Excellenceiv. This project and work that the CIC is doing is of great interest.

I’ve already begun working with a graduate student intern from the library program at the University of Maryland evaluating PURL for Department of Commerce publication created by the Government Printing Office. We are exploring several elements that will assist in the development of the national bibliography. It is our intention to publish these finding in an Occasional Paper series sponsored by the Government Documents Roundtable.

Time table

  • March-April
    Focus will be on the development and clean-up of the national bibliography. I will be working closely with the intern who will be finishing up at the end of April on the evaluation of PURLs and its relationship to the nation bibliography. During this time, I am planning on meeting with librarians from Department of Commerce (DOC) to see what resources they have to assist in creating a national bibliography. It is also my intention to strengthen public service ties with DOC so that Penn State can be recognized as a “Center of Excellence” for the Department of Commerce.

  • May-June
    Focus will be on developing a systematic process for selecting tangible objects for digitization as well as methods for recording status in the national bibliography. This will require coordination with Special Collections and the Cataloging Departments within the University Libraries.

  • July-August
    Focus will be on strengthening partnerships and process with the State Library of Pennsylvania as well as with the University of Minnesota to build comprehensive tangible collections. We will also approach HathiTrust about methods for digesting content that has already been digitized that reside on unstable sites.

Reference

There has been so much written about digitization and federal government documents. If you are interested in knowing more about this subject rather than create a lengthy list of article I would recommend reading the Ithaka report submitted to the Government Printing Office on May 16, 2011. This can be found at: http://www.fdlp.gov/home/about/1006-fdlp-modeling

It contains a fairly comprehensive list of publications and provides an excellent contextual summary of the issues and challenges of digitizing federal government information.

  

i If you would like to explore the efforts of the CIC government documents community in relationship to the Google project go to: http://www.cic.net/Home/Projects/Library/BookSearch/Govdocs.aspx

ii GPO does have a Digitization Project Registry, but this is more of an ad hoc collection of digitization projects focusing on digitization methodology rather than comprehensiveness. Go to: http://registry.fdlp.gov/

iii For those who are interested, these records include: title, SUDOC, OCLC number, and limited holdings information.

iv Association of Southeastern Research Libraries has a strong government documents library group. If you are interested in exploring their initiative go to: http://www.aserl.org/programs/gov-doc/

Back to top