Category Archives: Uncategorized

TARO Index Terms Survey

Dear TARO participants,

 We need your input to plan our path forward in relation to the Index Terms (also known as <controlaccess> terms) such as personal and corporate names, subject terms, and genre terms used in finding aids submitted to TARO.

 As you may know, TARO has not in the past strictly required use of a particular controlled vocabulary, and repositories have used what fit their collections. This has resulted in a rather wide variety of headings in TARO, raising concerns for the user’s experience in trying to browse TARO by index terms. Imagine for example, browsing across all name, subject, or format headings in TARO – there would be similar headings with minor differences in them, some finding aids with many headings and some with few, some with ending punctuation and others with none, some with local headings, some with only authorized headings.

 We are therefore exploring whether it makes sense to either:

1.) Engage in TARO-wide index term clean up work (with repository participation / approval) and require use of only specific vocabularies going forward or

2.) Leave repositories to use vocabularies as they wish, and implement software (Metadata Hopper) to apply broad subject categories for browsing purposes. A program using this software is the [explore.chicagocollections.org]Chicago Collections.

 Many repositories will have varied answers to these questions, please just answer as best you can. The information will not be publicized; it will only be used to get an honest view for planning purposes.

 Please answer our very brief survey by Friday June 2, 2017.

TARO workshop coming up May 2017

Hello fellow TARO folks —

Amy Bowman and I are excited to offer a TARO workshop May 24, 2017,
at the Society of Southwest Archivists annual meeting,
located this year in beautiful Fayetteville, Arkansas.
Watch for registration through the Society of Southwest Archivists, opening soon.

The workshop has a max size of 15 participants, so sign up early if you are interested.
If there is a wait list, we can discuss a Winter offering in a Texas location.

Here is a description:

Introduction to TARO: Encoding and Submitting Finding Aids

Date: Wednesday, May 24

Time: 10.00 am – 5.00 pm (full day) 1.00 – 5.00 pm (half-day)

Cost: $100.00 (full day – price includes box lunch)/$50.00 (half-day)

Location: SSA Conference Hotel (info)

Trainer: Amy Bowman and Amanda Focke

Description:

This workshop will teach the hands-on basic skills needed to participate in TARO, including basic XML familiarity and editing, EAD familiarity, how to upload files to TARO, and troubleshooting. The full day is recommended for those with little or no TARO, EAD, or XML experience. The half-day (afternoon only) is recommended as a refresher for those who might feel rusty and/or have work environment changes which have changed their approach to TARO (such as using collection management software now instead of hand-encoding XML). The workshop is open to anyone but is focused on TARO guidelines and workflows.

This is not an intensive EAD course, or an intensive XML class, but will show the basics to get you started and share resources to help you once you return to your workplace.

_____________________________________________
Would you like a detailed class specifically on EAD/XML?
Amigos is offering such a class live-online (four 2-hr sessions), in March 2017.
Get the details here: http://www.amigos.org/node/3587

All best,
Amanda Focke
Rice University
TARO Steering Committee Chair, 2017

TARO grant and Steering Committee Update

Dear TARO members,

As we move into the next phase of the TARO infrastructure update, Amanda Focke and I wanted to send out an update about our NEH planning grant and share the next steps for the TARO Steering Committee.

The final version of our NEH planning grant may be reviewed here. Our deepest thanks go out to all of you who helped make this grant happen with your participation on TARO committees this year—we accomplished a whole lot during the grant term! Amanda and I were especially pleased that we were able to include a Memorandum of Understanding with UT Libraries in the final report. A special thanks goes out to Aaron Choate from UT Libraries for writing the MOU and steering it through UT Libraries’ administration. Note that the MOU covers just the interim grant phase, it is not a final determination of TARO’s institutional home. However, this MOU does provides us with a solid home base from which to apply for implementation funds.

TARO will now head into a new phase with its the Steering Committee, which will be a smaller group over the coming months: Amanda Focke will serve as Chair, Sandra Yates will serve as Vice-Chair, Carol Mead will serve as Secretary, and Carla Alvarez, Ann Hodges, and Kelly Kerbow-Hudson will be our At-Large Reps. In addition, Aaron Choate will become much more involved with the TARO Steering Committee, acting as the UT Libraries representative on the committee. Steering Committee members will no longer chair subcommittees.

We hope that everyone who’d like to be involved the TARO implementation project will continue to do so through TARO subcommittees; we expect that subcommittee work will begin ramping up again in the New Year after the new Steering Committee has had a chance to meet.

There’s a lot to look forward to with TARO over the next year, including the continuation  and conclusion of the schema conversion project, planning for submission of the implementation grant, continued discussions regarding TARO’s institutional home, and ongoing updates to TARO spaces like the blog and wiki. In addition, Amanda and I are also happy to announce that we’ll be giving a TARO training workshop at SSA in Fayetteville in May 2017.

Best,

Amy and Amanda

___________________________________

Amy Bowman, Outgoing Co-Chair, TARO Steering Committee Photographs Archivist, Briscoe Center for American History

Feedback for governance plan / Nominations for next Steering Committee

Dear TARO representatives,

1.) The TARO Steering Committee is wrapping up its NEH Planning Grant, and would like to take steps to formalize its committee structure while working toward writing an implementation funding grant. Please see the TARO Bridge Governance Plan online here. Comments are welcome and will be accepted through September 30, 2016. Please submit comments to the TARO list or to the current TARO co-chairs, Amy Bowman (a.bowman@austin.utexas.edu) and Amanda Focke (afocke@rice.edu).

2.)
TARO would like your participation in forming the next TARO Steering Committee. To that end we ask for nominations as described in the Bridge Governance plan:
 “Steering Committee members may be nominated until two weeks before an election. Self­-nomination is permitted. Candidates for the Steering Committee will provide brief statements detailing their reasons for running and provide a summary of their qualifications to the Nominating Committee. These statements will be distributed electronically to TARO members at least one week prior to the elections.  For the formal vote in October, each member institution may submit one vote (ballot).”
Nominations accepted (by this online form) until October 7, 2016,
the slate will then be distributed, with online voting opening Friday Oct 21 ending Friday Oct. 28, 2016 (also by an online form).

Thanks so much for offering any feedback on the governance plan and for nominating candidates for the Steering Committee,
TARO co-chairs, Amanda Focke (afocke@rice.edu) and Amy Bowman (a.bowman@austin.utexas..edu)


Current list of steering committee members: https://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/admin/staff.html

Update on schema conversion Summer 2016

Fellow TARO folks,

We are wrapping up schema conversion for repositories who already create schema-compliant EAD using ArchivesSpace and Archon (known as “Group A”).
Directions for those repositories are online at TARO Today blog (using Archon, and using ArchivesSpace).

We have begun working individually with the hand encoders known as “Group B,” as listed below.
San Jacinto Museum of History was converted last week and the process went smoothly.
Updated instructions for working with TARO-friendly EAD are available here.

Below is the schedule for Group B, with Group C following in early 2017.
Basic info on how the conversion process works and which group each repository is in

Thanks, everyone!
Amanda Focke, TARO Steering Committee co-chair

account repository Conversion Date
sjmh San Jacinto Museum of History (Oxygen) July 12-14
tslac Texas State Library and Archives Commission (Oxygen) July 26-27
swcpc Texas Tech University, (Oxygen) August 2-4
tturb Texas Tech University, Rare Books (Oxygen) August 2-4
ttusw Texas Tech University, Southwest Collection (Oxygen) August 2-4
ttuua Texas Tech University, University Archives (Oxygen) August 2-4
ttuav Texas Tech University, Audio Visual (Oxygen) August 2-4
utlac The University of Texas at Austin. Benson Latin American Collection (Oxygen) August 16-18
utlsc H.J. Lutcher Stark Center, University of Texas at Austin (Notepad++) August 30-Sept 1
uttyler University Archives and Special Collections The University of Texas at Tyler (limbo between Archon/AS) August 30-Sept 1
utsa University of Texas San Antonio (Oxygen) August 30-Sept 1
tsusm Texas State University (Oxygen) Sept 13-Sept 15
dalpub Texas/Dallas History and Archives Division, Dallas Public Library (NoteTab) Sept 13-Sept 15
utlaw Tarlton Law Library, University of Texas at Austin (Oxygen) Sept 13-Sept 15
utmb Truman G. Blocker, Jr. History of Medicine Collections, Moody Medical Library, University of Texas Medical Branch (Oxygen) Sept 27-Sept 29
smu Southern Methodist University (Oxygen) Sept 27-Sept 29
hamtmc Houston Academy of Medicine-Texas Medical Center Library, John P. McGovern Historical Collections and Research Center (Oxygen) Sept 27-Sept 29
apts Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary (Notepad++) Oct 11-Oct 13
aushc Austin History Center, Austin Public Library (NoteTab) Oct 11-Oct 13
utarl University of Texas Arlington Library, Special Collections (XMetal) Oct 25 – Oct 27
uthrc Harry Ransom Humanities Research Center, University of Texas at Austin(Oxygen) Nov 8 – Nov 10
drtsa Daughters of the Republic of Texas Library at the Alamo (Oxygen) Nov 29 – Dec 1
houpub Houston Public Library, Houston Metropolitan Research Center (limbo between AT/AS) Nov 29 – Dec 1
utcah The University of Texas at Austin. Dolph Briscoe Center for American History (Oxygen) Dec 13 – Dec 15

schema conversion – ready for Group B

Fellow TARO participants,

It is now time for the “Group B” TARO repositories to be scheduled for conversion to schema compliance.

If any repositories in that group are interested in being scheduled for this work sooner rather than later, please reply to Amanda Focke (afocke@rice.edu) by the end of this week, July 1.

After hearing from repositories, we will post a specific schedule for conversion, and begin working with the first repositories.

Here is the blog post with the year’s schedule and basic info on how this will work.
**Please remember Minnie Rangel at TARO will do the conversion work and each repository will have help and personal attention along the way, ending with the repository having what they need to start submitting schema compliant finding aids.**

Here is the list (from that blog post of the Group B repositories):

Group B: Roughly scheduled for Summer / early Fall

Austin History Center, Austin Public Library (NoteTab)
Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary (Notepad++)
Daughters of the Republic of Texas Library at the Alamo (Oxygen)
Harry Ransom Humanities Research Center, University of Texas at Austin(Oxygen)
Houston Academy of Medicine-Texas Medical Center Library, John P. McGovern Historical Collections and Research Center (Oxygen)
Houston Public Library, Houston Metropolitan Research Center (limbo between AT/AS)
San Jacinto Museum of History (Oxygen)
Southern Methodist University (Oxygen)
Stark Center, University of Texas at Austin (Notepad++)
Stephen F. Austin University (limbo between Archon/AS)
Tarlton Law Library, University of Texas at Austin (Oxygen)
Texas State Library and Archives Commission (Oxygen)
Texas Tech University Southwest Collection/Special Collections Library (Oxygen)
Texas/Dallas History and Archives Division, Dallas Public Library (NoteTab)
The University of Texas at Austin. Alexander Architectural Archive (Oxygen) –CONVERTED FEB 2016 IN TARO PILOT WORK
The University of Texas at Austin. Benson Latin American Collection (Oxygen)
The University of Texas at Austin. Dolph Briscoe Center for American History (Oxygen)
Truman G. Blocker, Jr. History of Medicine Collections,
Moody Medical Library, University of Texas Medical Branch (Oxygen)
Tyrrell Historical Library (Oxygen) University Archives and Special Collections The University of Texas at Tyler (limbo between Archon/AS)
University of Texas Arlington Library, Special Collections (XMetal)
University of Texas San Antonio (Oxygen)

 

Authority Control at TARO: Common Encoding Issues

Last week I posted the first (summary) section of the report I wrote about the use of EAD <controlaccess> index terms by TARO’s forty-plus contributing repositories. The second section of the report, below, outlines some of the more frequent encoding inconsistencies and problems, issues that make difficult the automated aggregation of terms necessary for faceted browsing/navigation. —Tim Kindseth


 

No values

In over 400 instances, a <controlaccess> element was used with null values. In other cases, the value is populated with placeholder text resembling encoder comments, which is likely residue from an EAD template.

  • <persname></persname>
  • <persname>NAME (SPECIFY SOURCE, ADD MORE AS NEEDED)</persname>

 

Syntax (of attributes)

EAD does not require either the @encodinganalog or @source attribute to appear before or after the other. Inconsistent syntax, though, makes it extremely difficult to extract data for analysis and normalization.

  • <persname encodinganalog=”600″ source=”lcnaf”>Ferguson, Miriam Amanda, 1875-1961.</persname>
  • <persname source=”lcnaf” encodinganalog=”600″>Ferguson, Miriam Amanda, 1875-1961.</persname>

 

Periods

LCSH and LCNAF values, when properly written, end in a period. Whether or not TARO wishes to retain this convention, terms should be constructed either with or without an ending period, not both ways.

  • <persname encodinganalog=”600″ source=”lcnaf”>Ferguson, Miriam Amanda, 1875-1961.</persname>
  • <persname encodinganalog=”600″ source=”lcnaf”>Ferguson, Miriam Amanda, 1875-1961</persname>

 

Dashes & spaces

Value subdivisions are sometimes separated by two dashes with no spaces between the dashes and values, or two dashes with a space between the dashes and values; at other times the subdivisions are delineated by an em dash with (or without) spaces between the dash and values.

  • <subject>Mexican Americans––Civil rights––Texas.</subject>
  • <subject>Mexican Americans –– Civil rights –– Texas.</subject>
  • <subject>Mexican Americans—Civil rights—Texas.</subject>
  • <subject>Mexican Americans — Civil rights — Texas.</subject>

 

Element confusion

 With place names in particular, Library of Congress subject headings are often encoded incorrectly as <geogname> control access terms. Many authorized Library of Congress subject headings are built by appending a time period or subject to a city or country name, which may explain why what is technically a subject (Dallas (Tex.)––History.) so often ends up being encoded as a geographic name. EAD3 (discussed later) allows for the parsing of encoded values and may help eliminate this confusion.

  • <geogname>Houston (Tex.)––History.</geogname>
  • SHOULD BE <subject>Houston (Tex.)––History.</subject>
  • OR <geogname>Houston (Tex.)</geogname>

 

Contradictory/dissimilar values

A set of birth and death years might appear within one <persname> element while a different set (or none at all) appears in another, even though both occurrences refer to the same individual. This happens both across and within repositories.

  • <persname>Moore, Charles Willard, 1925-1993</persname>
  • <persname>Moore, Charles Willard, 1925-1992</persname>
  • <persname>Lipscomb, Mance</persname>
  • <persname>Lipscomb, Mance, 1895-1976<persname>

 

Encoding levels

EAD2002 allows <controlaccess> terms to be nested within a main <controlaccess> heading. Repositories sometimes include <controlaccess> elements within this top level, sometimes one level down, and sometimes at both levels. When extracting TARO’s 153,000 index terms, BaseX queries thus had to be performed at two levels. This could cause unnecessary problems for a script that attempts to cull all <controlaccess> instances for display during search and retrieval.

  • <controlaccess><head>Index Terms</head><corpname>Daughters of the Republic of Texas.</corpname></controlaccess>
  • <controlaccess><head>Index Terms</head><controlaccess><head>Organizations:</head <corpname>Daughters of the Republic of Texas.</corpname></controlaccess></controlaccess>

Authority Control at TARO

Yesterday, TARO Steering Committee Co-chair Amy Bowman e-mailed members of the consortium a link to all of the EAD <controlaccess> datasets, broken down by repository, that we extracted and wrangled this spring. I spoke briefly about our work during last month’s TARO brown bag presentation at the Society of Southwest Archivists’ annual meeting in Oklahoma City. Both Amy and I also thought it would be a good idea to publish here on TARO Today the more relevant sections of the report on consortial authority control that I wrote and submitted to the TARO standards committee as part of my final master’s degree Capstone project at UT-Austin’s School of Information. Each (work) day for the next week or so I’ll be posting, sequentially, another section of the document, beginning with the overview below. For a copy of the full report, please get in touch with Amy or e-mail me at tim [dot] kindseth [at] utexas [dot] edu. —Tim Kindseth


 

OVERVIEW

Control access, or index, terms are a well-established bibliographic convention. Within archival practice, however, the selection, use, search, and browsing of such terms is not so straightforward. Whereas books and other published items typically have well-defined scopes (and thereby topics), making the choice of control access terms rather intuitive or self-evident, it is much more difficult to choose just a handful of subjects or other authorities (persons, corporate bodies, genres, geographic place names) for, say, a collection of twenty-five boxes of unpublished manuscript material generated over four decades in the course of entirely unrelated activities and life events. Yet since the adoption of Encoded Archival Description in the late 1990s, archivists across the United States, Texas included, have been trying to do just that: select three to five (occasionally ten or more) representative index terms that will somehow do justice, will encompass, the startling breadth and depth of topics that a single archival collection can cover.

The hope is that these representative control access terms might function as arterials into archival finding aids, a genre that is still the source of much researcher confusion. Before EAD, the reference archivist was, for most researchers, among the main sources of information about any particular repository’s collections. Online EAD finding aids, one could argue, have come to play a similar role, transmitting to researchers, many of whom cannot easily travel to this or that collecting institution, not just information about individual collections but, in the case of an EAD consortium like the Online Archive of California (OAC) or Texas Archival Resources Online (TARO), information about how those collections relate to one another as well.

Relational collection mapping in theory makes material easier to find, more accessible and retrievable, and is the basis and goal of larger movements within information science like Linked Open Data and the Semantic Web. To get collections to talk to collections, though, is no easy task. Metadata from one finding aid must be able to converse with that of another, which requires an unforgiving level of shared data structure. For index terms to link up and self-aggregate across the repositories that comprise any consortium, control access terms must be crafted in exactly the same way across potentially dozens of institutions with varied familiarity with EAD and generally differing levels of archival expertise. Enter controlled vocabularies and best practices guidelines, both gentle nudges toward synchronicity in the ways in which archivists, many with dissimilar levels of experience or institutional support, encode their repository’s finding aids.

Rules are one thing; following them, however, is another. Katherine M. Wisser and Jackie Dean’s analysis of EAD tag usage across 1,136 finding aids from 108 anonymized repositories, published in The American Archivist in 2013, found that “little uniformity exists in encoding practices.” They concluded, “Variability in implementation of encoding standards has the potential to diminish the ability to aggregate records and effectively leverage structures for management and retrievability.” In 2014, Dr. Ciaran Trace and three others at UT-Austin looked at a set of 8,729 TARO finding aids and reached similar conclusions as Wisser and Dean about EAD data quality. “With humans in the mix,” they realized, “issues with the quality of the encoding can be expected.” This human hurdle must first be recognized before the issue of inconsistency can be surmounted. “Finding and documenting such problems with EAD encoding,” they argued, “is a key first step in instituting more rigorous control over descriptive and encoding practices that facilitate the aggregation, visualization and analysis of archival data.” Such aggregations and visualizations, which make possible the subject browsing and searching (faceted or otherwise) features that TARO is considering during its redesign, require clean data, and in order to clean it, you first have to locate the mess.

From January through May 2016, for my master’s Capstone project at UT-Austin’s School of Information, that was precisely my task: find where and in which ways TARO <controlaccess> values were dirty and, moreover, come up with ways to clean, or normalize, that data so that index terms, not currently searchable through TARO’s online interface, might in the future, with a revamping of that interface, be harnessed to provide subject searching and/or browsing, thereby increasing discoverability of the archival material described by TARO’s online finding aids. Amy Bowman of the Briscoe Center for American History, who supervised the project, and I performed BaseX queries on the more than 14,000 EAD documents from 46 repositories currently stored on TARO’s server. Over 153,000 <controlaccess> terms were extracted, converted into spreadsheets (grouped both by institution and by EAD element), and analyzed for common encoding errors or inconsistencies using OpenRefine’s clustering algorithms. All the while, a literature review on authority control and subject searching in archival settings was conducted. Several underlying, interrelated, unresolved sets questions emerged during the project:

  • If the 153,000-plus <controlaccess> terms encoded in TARO finding aids are to be normalized, against which controlled vocabularies should they be reconciled, and should the reconciliation occur federally (by TARO) or individually by each contributing repository?
  • What are the online information-seeking behaviors of archives researchers? In the age of Google and keyword searching, is topic/name browsing a thing of the past? If so, is consortial authority control a hobgoblin, an unnecessary expenditure of time and other resources? Have subject browsing features been effective for the consortiums, like Archives West, that have implemented them?
  • How will eventual implementation of EAD3, which was released last year, change the way contributing institutions must encode <controlaccess> terms, and what will be the benefits for search and discovery? To avoid repeating the same (rather complicated and onerous) process twice, should TARO wait until consortial adoption of EAD3 to normalize those terms in accordance with new encoding requirements?
  • How can the future selection and encoding of index terms (whether per EAD2002 or EAD3) be standardized (and remain so) across 46 contributing repositories? What best practices should be in place, and how strictly should they be enforced?

That final set of questions is perhaps the most crucial. My own personal belief is that for authority control to work, control must be part of the equation. Even if TARO is able to normalize all of its current <controlaccess> terms, without consortial enforcement of some kind there will be no guarantee, given the heterogeneous ways that institutions encode finding aids (manually keying the EAD in a text editor vs. generating it automatically with archival management software tools like ArchivesSpace), that future <controlaccess> metadata will be crafted uniformly across all repositories. To date, as our extraction and analysis of TARO’s 153,000 index terms has revealed, there has been very little consistency in the encoding of such terms. Tables breaking down the extracted data in various broad categories, by element, by controlled vocabulary, and by individual repository, can be found near the end of this document. What follows in the next section details some of the more frequent encoding errors and inconsistencies both across and within TARO’s contributing members. It is not at all unusual, for instance, for a subject, person, corporation, place, or other <controlaccess> element to be encoded in divergent ways by the same repository.

The section following that is more speculative, outlining general issues to bear in mind as TARO redesigns its interface. How well that interface functions hinges on the quality of the metadata beneath it, which the title of a 2009 OCLC report written by Jennifer Schaffner makes clear: “The Metadata is the Interface.” Schaffner emphasizes what’s at stake in any effort (like TARO’s) to improve the quality of descriptive metadata: “It would be heartbreaking,” she writes, “if special collections and archives remained invisible because they might not have the kinds of metadata that can easily be discovered by users on the open Web.”

1st draft available for review: TARO schema-compliant encoding guidelines

On behalf of Rebecca Romanchuk and Carla Alvarez, TARO Standards Committee co-chairs, please read the following asking for your feedback on the new schema-compliant encoding guidelines, which will be used by all TARO repositories after each repository is converted to schema compliance later this year.
Please know that doing your conversion, you will have oneonone contact with a TARO volunteer to help you get started submitting finding aids in schema format using these guidelines, but we welcome your feedback on the guidelines now. ___________________________________________________________________________The TARO Standards subcommittee is pleased to announce that we have completed our first draft of the
EAD 2002 Schema Best Practice Guidelines for TARO!

Texas Archival Resources Online (TARO), Texas’ EAD finding aid consortial site – https://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/, is in the midst of an NEH planning grant to develop improved systems and updated standards for TARO as it achieves sustainability to serve the archival research community into the future. Part of this work is to create new encoding guidelines for TARO repositories that c onform to the EAD 2002 Schema encoding standard, which TARO will complete conversion to in 2016. These best practice guidelines (BPG) are available as a PDF at http://bit.ly/1Wk6p6W. The BPG appendices are a TARO-friendly sample Schema-compliant template for EAD encoding for your use, and an EAD finding aid ex ample. These appendices are also available at the same link as XML files.

We welcome feedback addressing every aspect of our BPG.

Go to http://goo.gl/forms/gaJXiCVtp4 to complete a brief survey to give us your ideas for how the BPG can better address your needs for EAD encoding. The survey is configured to adapt its questions depending on whether your repository is a TARO member, or if you are in Texas and have not yet joined TARO, or if you are outside of Texas and want to give us your general feedback.

Please complete the survey by Friday, June 3, 2016.

If you encode for TARO, we need to hear from you. The BPG, which will be a key tool for TARO participants, offers detailed guidance on creating EAD XML files. Even participants who export XML from software such as ArchivesSpace (and don’t see the raw XML) will need to follow TARO protocols as described in the BPG, such as formatting the <eadid>. You will need to follow the BPG in order to submit your Schema-compliant files to TARO, which each repository will be required to do by the end of 2016.

The co-chairs of the TARO Standards subcommittee extend sincere thanks to its members for their superb contributions to the BPG. Invaluable support has been provided during our drafting process by TARO Steering Committee co-chairs Amanda Focke and Amy Bowman, UT Libraries TARO technical support staff Minnie Rangel, and our NEH planning grant project manager Leigh Grinstead and grant consultant Jodi Allison-Bunnell. We are also grateful to the EAD consortial community at large for the encoding documentation they make available online, in particular Online Archive of California and Archives West, which are models that have guided us.

Cordially,

Carla Alvarez, MA, CA (co-chair – TARO Standards subcommittee)
Rare Books and Manuscripts
Nettie Lee Benson Latin American Collection
University of Texas at Austin

Rebecca Romanchuk, MLIS, CA (co-chair – TARO Standards subcommittee)
Team Lead, Archives / Archivist II
Archives and Information Services
Texas State Library and Archives Commission

TARO Standards subcommittee members:  
Maristella Feustle (UNT-Music Library),
Cynthia Franco (SMU-DeGolyer Library),
Molly Hults (Austin Public Library-Austin History Center),
Benna Vaughan (Baylor University-Texas Collection),
Jeffrey Warner (Rice University-Woodson Research Center).

Reminder: comments due by April15

Friendly reminder! Comments due on this document with TARO’s mission, vision, and more due by April 15. Thanks!

The TARO Steering Committee has worked with Leigh Grinstead, TARO’s NEH Planning Grant Manager, to create the following  collection development document articulating TARO’s purpose, background, mission, vision, audience, project scope, participation criteria and more.

This document is an important beginning step toward formalizing TARO. Additional documents will also be developed, such as TARO Best Practices Guidelines, and we continue to explore organizational issues and new platform options.

We invite you to read this collection development document and send any comments by April 15
to the TARO listserv (taro-lib@utlists.utexas.edu)
or directly to the co-chairs and project manager:

Co-chairs:
Amanda Focke, Rice University, afocke@rice.edu &
Amy Bowman, Briscoe Center for American Studies, a.bowman@austin.utexas.edu

Project Manager for NEH Planning Grant:
Leigh Grinstead, Lyrasis, leigh.grinstead@lyrasis.org
Thanks,
Amanda

Want to see more details such as meeting minutes and more? Go to the TARO wiki.