1. National Information Standards Organization
SIP 3 Standards Development
Status Report
June 2013
1

2. Brief SIP History
• Originally developed by 3M in mid 1990s for self-checkout
devices
• Although owned by 3M, widespread use for other related
applications (authentication, print management, self
checkout, etc.)
• SIP2 released in 2006 – introduced new messages and
additional functions
• ILS (and other vendors) adopted SIP2 but needed to write
local (non-standard) enhancements and extensions for
particular applications (notably, item-based payments)
2

3. SIP3 initiative
• 3M began early discussion on SIP3 as early as 2007-2008
• Early 3M draft was used as working document by 3M-
based working group; input from library industry, 2011-
2012
• Summer 2012 – 3M donates SIP to NISO for formal
standards process and future development
• Summer-Fall 2012: NISO organizes SIP3 Working Group to
move SIP3 through standardization process
3

4. SIP3 Working Group
John Bodfish, OCLC – co-chair
Ted Koppel, Auto-Graphics co-chair
Approx. 11 active members, several less-than-active
members
Includes:
Biblionix
Bibliotecha
Ceridwen
Envisionware
Ex Libris
Polaris
TLC
4

5. SIP3 Working Group – Activity Goals
• Protocol Document
• Corrections, Omissions, Additions, resolve ambiguities
• Create Implementers Guide, scope notes, application hints
• Privacy issues
• Information sharing between partners, particularly cross-borders
• Plan for and recommend maintenance agency and
update/enhancement process
• SIP3 and relationship to NCIP
5

6. Status report
October 2012
Began meeting, set agenda
November-December 2012
Assembled lists of known errors/omissions/ambiguities.
Identified approx. 75, split between errors in the 3M draft
documentation and errors/inconsistencies in the actual
protocol
January 2013
Resolved almost all of the documentation issues and
about 1/3 of protocol issues (low-hanging fruit)
6

7. Status Report 2
January 2013-present
• Currently Addressing more difficult issues
• Strawman documents to lay out possible solutions
• Sometimes required subcommittees to address
• Recent examples
• Require HTTPS?
• How to deal with multiple languages – client server?
• Dealing with SIP2 limitations (field size on 63/64 message, for example,
for consortia)
7

8. NCIP and SIP3
Exact relationship will eventually require NCIP and SIP3 joint
meetings
General guidelines as of now:
• SIP3 will generally be pointed to intra-library applications
• NCIP will generally be pointed at inter-library (and external to the
library) applications
• Complementary toolset and messages
• Idea is that developer will pick the best tool for the job
8

9. Working group
• Currently meets bi-weekly
• Subcommittees as needed
• Planned completion: End of Year 2013 or earlier
9