Hello Lee, 

I just began the evaluation for Digital Commons as well. I had a very
similar idea. I am not sure if this is the preferred method, but I indicated
in red text which requirement out of the group that was not met and gave a
brief explanation.  I also left the group without a "X" if one function of
the group is not met.

Jamie


On 10/14/10 10:25 AM, "Lee Dotson" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> I am working on the CONTENTdm evaluation and need some input. I am comfortable
> responding to most of the lettered sections, but not sure about how to respond
> to the "CHARACTERISTICS AND SERVICES DESIRED IN A DIGITAL LIBRARY SERVICE
> PROVIDER" at the bottom. Should we respond to these as the current provider or
> only respond to questions above about the system itself?
> 
> Also, some of the requirements have multiple functions listed in a single row.
> For example, under A. Architecture #4 reads "A bibliographic item can easily
> be added to a collection, assigned to a new collection, allocated to multiple
> collections, or deleted from a collection by library." If individual aspects
> of the requirement do not meet the requirement (like if an item cannot easily
> be assigned to a new collection), I have been changing the text to red and was
> planning to add a brief explanation. Will that work or should I do something
> different? I just started reviewing so am totally amenable to any changes at
> this point.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Lee
> 
>