Content-Type: text/html

Hi Lee, 

That is a good idea. Perhaps we can use numbers instead of "X" so that it is
easier to tally in the end. Maybe partial is a 0.5 and a full is 1. What
does the group think?

Jamie


On 10/14/10 10:46 AM, "Lee Dotson" <<a href="/cgi-bin/wa?LOGON=A3%3Dind10%26L%3DSUSDIGIT-L%26E%3D8bit%26P%3D6294631%26B%3D--%26T%3Dtext%252Fplain%3B%2520charset%3Dus-ascii" >[log in to unmask]</a>> wrote:

> Hi Jamie,
> 
> Great minds think alike! The only difference is that I was going to give the
> partial fulfillment ones a lower case x and the ones that met all functions an
> upper case X. If no functions are met I have left blank.
> 
> Lee
> 
>>>> Jamie Rogers <<a href="/cgi-bin/wa?LOGON=A3%3Dind10%26L%3DSUSDIGIT-L%26E%3D8bit%26P%3D6294631%26B%3D--%26T%3Dtext%252Fplain%3B%2520charset%3Dus-ascii" >[log in to unmask]</a>> 10/14/2010 10:42 AM >>>
> 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" <<a href="/cgi-bin/wa?LOGON=A3%3Dind10%26L%3DSUSDIGIT-L%26E%3D8bit%26P%3D6294631%26B%3D--%26T%3Dtext%252Fplain%3B%2520charset%3Dus-ascii" >[log in to unmask]</a>> 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
>> 
>>