In the last issue of TSLL I mentioned that we were hoping for better results this year than last for our programs at the annual meeting. I can safely say that we are in a better place this year than we were last year, and I think we can look forward to a meeting that will be truly beneficial to technical services librarians in the legal community. We submitted eleven program proposals and one workshop proposal. The workshop proposal (on basic book repair) was turned down for a variety of reasons, one of them being a perception that libraries already have some access to such training at local meetings. I have discussed this with Preservation Committee chair Pat Turpening, and she has indicated that the Preservation Committee will look into the reality of this claim and some other issues raised in the hope of preparing the proposal in a way that will be more convincing to the Program Selection Committee in the future. Of our eleven program proposals, six were accepted for the annual meeting. These include:

» Cataloging ala carte(a "double" program taking up two time slots)
» Internet Use in Technical Services : Crossroads of Opportunity
» Crosswalks to Information Management: Metadata What is it? Who is Using It? How is it Being Used?(cosponsored with OBS)
» Preservation at the Crossroads : Debate Between the World of Print and the Brave New World of Digital
» Loose-Leafs at the Crossroads : Redefining Seriality
» Collection Development Policies for Electronic Format Materials

In addition, one independently submitted program, Classifying International Legal Materials Using LC Scheme: Classification at the Crossroads, has been accepted as well as several OBS programs which will have relevance for TSSIS members. Also keep in mind a "Knowledge Management" seminar that OCLC hopes to present as an adjunct to the annual meeting. Registration information for that is separate and can be found at the OCLC Web site http:// www.oclc.org/institute/seminar2a.htm. So, all in all, I think we have a decent number of offerings to keep a technical services librarian interested and informed at the upcoming meeting.

We also have a couple of roundtables (in addition to the traditional ones, which are still in place) on metadata and loose-leafs. These will allow us to explore these complex areas in a less formal way in addition to the prepared presentations.

I would like to express again my thanks to everyone who worked hard to make these programs a reality, and a special thanks to Anne Myers of Boston University who, in addition to being a member of TS and OBS, was our liaison with the Annual Meeting Program Selection Committee. Members of that Committee work very hard and mostly hear complaints (sort of like working in a TS department) so I think it is important to note how well-served we have been by Anne and the entire committee.

Along with a good number of educational programs at the annual meeting, we also have 15 separate meetings to conduct SIS business of one kind or another. We had a chance for a bit more flexibility for the upcoming meeting. However, the fact that we also have a number of educational offerings with which it would be unfortunate to conflict has kept me from scheduling too much out of the normal early morning and late afternoon time slots. Last year we were all disappointed to see our business meeting relegated to almost the last possible moment of the convention with a resulting dearth of attendees. This year it has been placed back on the Sunday schedule, although somewhat earlier (10:00 a.m.) than tradition calls for. This was done to avoid conflicting with the OBS business meeting in the afternoon; it is also being held during a time when the "types-of-library" SIS's have many of their morning-long functions. I realize that this raises some potential conflicts, just as last year's scheduling of the OBS and TS business meetings at the same time did. That is the disadvantage of having so many separate functions; the advantage should be that everyone should have an opportunity to attend some meetings that will be useful and interesting. As these meeting times have not been formalized yet, I won't publish them until we have something firm.

You may (or may not) remember that I planned to initiate an ad hoc committee to look into the structure, function, and practices of the TS-SIS. So far I have asked members of the 1998-1999 Executive Board to review the TS-SIS documentation (bylaws, etc.) available at our Web site http://www.aallnet.org/sis/tssis/tssis.htm. I would also like to invite other members of the SIS to review these documents. What I am particularly interested in hearing are comments that address these issues:

» Are we adhering properly to our practices as laid out in these documents? If you see areas in which we have not performed properly, please point them out.
» Is the fundamental structure of the SIS logical and coherent? Should changes be made to reflect changes in the TS world?
» Are there any parts of the documentation that should be revised, excised, expanded, or rethought?
» Finally, I would appreciate any thoughts, opinions, gripes, or compliments about anything regarding the TS-SIS as we look toward improving it.

Please send your comments to me: thomas.2@nd.edu.

I want to sign off by encouraging you all to fill out and return the annual TSSIS survey that Janet McKinney will soon be sending out to you. Especially in light of our efforts to improve the SIS, the survey provides us with lots of valuable advice, insight, and (most importantly) names of good people to do the work of the SIS.

Joe Thomas
University of Notre Dame
thomas.2@nd.edu