diglib: libweb guidelines & exceptions: updated draft from 8/28 meeting

["Andrew R. Bonamici" <bonamici@uoregon.edu>]

All:

Thanks to all concerned for last Thursday's very productive meeting. Here 
is amended language for item #3 (pre-authorized exceptions), and #4. Per 
follow-up e-mail messages from Kirstin, David, & Juanita, I've added some 
blank spots for min/max sizes, but will need your help defining & 
accurately expressing the size range.

Other thoughts/comments?

Andrew
================
<begin>
Draft statement re. UO Libraries web development: guidelines & exceptions

1. The goal is a reasonable degree of consistency. Refer to WAG guiding 
principles at <http://libweb.uoregon.edu/iris/wag/>.

2. As a default, libweb authors are expected to adhere to published 
guidelines for content and design, using standard libweb styles and 
templates. Refer to Web Guidelines at 
<http://libweb.uoregon.edu/Webtools/guidelines/>. Within the guidelines, 
additional templates or design patterns may need to be developed for some 
types of content, for example, pages developed specifically for use in 
classroom instruction.  Libweb authors who identify categories of content 
that may require new templates or design patterns will discuss their needs 
with the WAG, who will provide referrals to other sources of help as 
appropriate.

3. It is recognized that standard libweb templates and guidelines may not 
be appropriate for unique projects with complex, multifaceted content 
and/or partners and audiences extending beyond the Libraries. Examples 
might include but are not limited to digital library projects, online 
exhibits, courseware, consortial projects, grant-funded projects, etc., 
where strict adherence to the templates could present barriers to database 
functionality, appropriate recognition of partners, or ability to highlight 
unique content at the top level of the site.

Web authors who believe that their project may require exemption from the 
guidelines will discuss options with the WAG, who will provide referrals to 
other sources of help as appropriate. These could include the IMG for 
design help, Catalog Department for metadata consultation, and Library 
Systems for database and hardware support. To avoid pro-forma reviews, the 
WAG will develop a list of clear-cut exceptions that do not require prior 
approval.

Digital library project proposals require prior review and approval of the 
Digital Collections gatekeeper group (DigColl) and Library Administration; 
refer to <http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~jqj/diglib/archive/doc00012.docOnline>.

Exhibit proposals require prior discussion and approval by the Exhibits 
Committee; refer to <http://libweb.uoregon.edu/exhibits/exhibit_policy.html>.

4. All Library web pages need to reflect current library and UO identity 
and branding elements. This includes pages otherwise exempt from standard 
guidelines, with the understanding that the presentation may vary, 
especially for projects with multiple partners or sponsors. As a minimum 
threshold, all library-based public web presentations -- including but not 
limited to libweb pages, digital library projects, exhibits, catalog/dbase 
search result screens, etc. -- will display
     a) the "O" (UO primary mark), in a size no smaller than ____and no 
larger than ______.
     b) "University of Oregon Libraries" or "UO Libraries" as linked text 
&/or in a graphic (as in current template banner).
     c) Address information that includes at a minimum:
               Complete URL
               Maintained by: firstname lastname, e-mail address
               Last revision: day, Month spelled-out, year
          In cases where this address information cannot be provided at 
the page level,
          a site-level "contact us" section may be substituted.

When non-UO or non-Libraries logos/identifiers are mandated, they should be 
incorporated into the design in a straightforward manner. Strategies that 
require development of new banners or other major design efforts should be 
avoided if possible.  The UO mark & Library identification need to be 
maintained as stated above.
---
[Comment: I don't think the following re. a library logo should be added to 
the guidelines, but could be used in a general communication from Admin 
&/or WAG]:
Note re. a UO Libraries logo (secondary mark): Although a library logo 
could be useful as a design element, we are not proceeding with a logo 
development process at this time (September 2003). First, logo development 
is typically associated with organization-wide identity, marketing & 
branding. These efforts are underway (or forthcoming) at the campus level, 
and we may be able to capitalize on that work. Also, the UO Libraries are 
in the midst of a broad-based effort to articulate our shared mission and 
values; this should also be used to inform any future logo/identity 
development process.
<end>