Comments: Jim Cross

I will not be attending the TSDS meeting, so here are my thoughts as a former CAIE member concerning, as Bill puts it, "what TSDS should be about and how it should transact its business in order to ensure the broadest input possible." I think TSDS had little choice but to expand the range of issues it is concerned with--the whole issue of metadata alone will result in myriad proposals. I do think that, without being parochial, we should try to deal with only the archival aspects of proposals.

Of course, this could lead to an expansion of what may be an already nearly unbearable workload (at least it seemed that way when *I* was on CAIE). I think that TSDS will need to prioritize and also understand that it may not be able to address all of the proposals that come to it or might be of interest. TSDS should also consider involving the SAA sections more by specifically asking them to consider certain proposals and provide recommendations. TSDS also needs to make use of its ability to create subcommittees. These subcommittee might only have one TSDS member on them (the chair), with the rest of the membership coming from outside TSDS. Not only can TSDS pull in needed expertise and broaden input, but it will also be sharing out the workload as well. Some of these subcommittees could be permanent or semi-permanent for standards we *know* we will be dealing with on a continuing basis; I know Kris and her group have been thinking about this for EAD.

Use Rob's matrix to develop *written* procedures for each type of standard, and procedures for those inevitable "we got this at the last minute and we need to have some recommendations NOW" situations. TSDS (and SAA) needs to improve "intelligence" capabilities so it can know ahead of time about proposed standards that it should consider reviewing, so it can keep those situations to a minimum. It should use the SAACAIE and even the Archives list more. TSDS should also get out of the standards maintenance business--it should set up the review schedule, remind the Standards Committee (and SAA) that it is time to review the standard and, of course, look at any revised standard that comes out of the review, but responsibility for actual standards maintenance should be with some other SAA body.

Expertise? the usual suspects--EAD, computer software and systems design, cataloging, specific formats (e.g. photographs, audio-visual materials), reference (including some knowledge of information-seeking behaviors), etc. I do think, however, that we should also have some practitioners generalists as well who are just interested in the this area. While it may take some time to educate them (and TSDS "old timers" should take the time to mentor them), they give a viewpoint that may escape the specialist. If nothing else, answering their "naive" questions may give some insight as to what educational efforts will be needed with the membership.