Due to major building activity, some collections are unavailable. Please check your requests before visiting. Learn more.
Friday 22 July 2011
Q.1 Can RFP responses be delivered electronically?
A.1 Request For Proposals (RFPs) cannot be delivered electronically: they will only be accepted by mail addressed to the Tender Box or by being personally placed in the Tender Box as per clause A6 of the RFP, by the due date for lodgement.
Q.2 Do you have funding for this project?
A.2 This procurement activity is a planned replacement of existing Library assets and funding is therefore currently available for the project. As detailed in B4 it is anticipated to select supplier(s) in December 2011 and sign any contract(s) in January 2012.
Q.3 Should responses include replies for all numbered requirements and scenarios?
A.3 The scope of the outcome requirements includes systems to operate across four main activities - collect, manage, preserve and deliver - across the breadth of our collections and range of material types. However bids do not necessarily have to respond to the full scope of the RFP. We welcome, for example, bids for systems that handle particular activities, such as a system for digitisation for internal Library users, or a system for delivery of content to end users. Proposals for systems handling particular material types, such as images, or a range of material types, such as solutions for sound and audiovisual materials, are also welcomed. Please note that although respondents are not required to bid to provide all services we may favour proposals which meet a broader or the full range of the Library’s requirements, based on the scope of our needs.
Whether respondents are addressing either all or some of the requirements, there is no need to provide a response against each of the numbered paragraphs within the Statement of Outcomes. It is important however that sufficient information is provided such that the Library receives a satisfactory indication of how the respondent will or will not, deliver the outcomes specified at B1.1 and meet the evaluation criteria.
Q.4 With regards to A1.1, how will you rank for purposes of short listing, part bids with full bids?
A.4 In developing the short listing of Respondents the Library will have regard to the need to access all service types and the desirability of maintaining competitive tension across all service groups.
Q.5 Are you looking for a vendor developed system or a COTS product?
A.5. For the purposes of the RFP, we are open to all solutions addressing our outcome requirements. This also includes development of a system through collaborative or partnership arrangements.
Q.6 How is the content to be delivered to users?
A.6 The scope of the outcome requirements includes support for a range of material types and file formats (see B2.4.1), and for these digital objects to be delivered to the public in a range of formats, methods and devices (see B2.4.2), which would include delivery through web-based interfaces, mobile devices, e-readers, streaming and download onto physical media.
Q.7 Are you open to delivering content to users through a cloud service?
A.7 Yes, we are interested in innovative solutions that deliver the desired outcomes in new and creative ways.
Q.8 Will VuFind be the front-end of the digital content?
A.8 The Trove search and discovery tool and the VuFind-based Open Public Access Catalogue (OPAC) will be entry points to the digital library services.
Q.9 Is the Library aiming to have an open architecture?
A.9 The Library has a significant in-house development capability, and therefore is looking for solutions that allow it to use its own choice of tools, currently available or those that will be available in the future. Examples of these tools include migration tools, special file format viewers and metadata extraction tools.
Q.10 What role will the Library systems, for which solutions must integrate with, listed in B3.1, play in the final Digital Library architecture?
A.10 We intend to use the systems listed in B3.1 for the functionality these systems deliver, and the RFP outcome requirements take into consideration the functions delivered by these systems . There may be instances where a function delivered by these systems is also listed as a RFP requirement where the systems listed in B3.1 may not fully meet our requirements. For example, there is a requirement for being able to accept secure online payments, while we also have a separate payment system that forms part of the Library environment. This is because the Library payment system currently only supports transactions for particular services and we may need payment systems for other service types.
We are open to proposals for systems that also deliver the functionality already provided by the systems listed in B3.1, if it forms part of an overall solution. However your proposal may not necessarily be advantaged by provision of this functionality as these additional features fall outside the scope of what we are trying to procure.
Q.11 Must all the standards in B3.4 be supported?
A. 11 Yes, the standards in B3.4 must be supported as they are either common technical standards for information systems (HTTP, XML) or widely used ones in the information management domain (metadata standards), that our systems currently use and support. For example the METS ALTO standard is used for our Newspapers content, and the WARC file format is used for our web archive content, so these are mandatory requirements. The components of the proposed systems that need to support these standards will depend on the architecture of your solution.
Monday 1 August 2011
Q.12 Can you provide the budget for the project?
A.12 This RFP is being used to provide information about the nature and scope of the Library’s requirements, to enable to Library to further refine those requirements and to short list Proposals for invitation to submit tenders for a select Request for Tender (RFT) stage, with the intention of encouraging innovative solutions. As we are not implying a specific solution or architecture, and in fact are interested in industry’s own range of delivery options, we will not be providing information about the project’s budget or the estimated value of the procurement activity.
Q.13 Can you provide more details in regards to the industry scan that took place prior to the release of the RFP?
A.13 The Library did undertake a market assessment of software of some known suppliers in order to research the market prior to undertaking this RFP. This involved engaging software suppliers for the purpose of observing and understanding the market, its products, capabilities and recent developments. The research took place over a 6 month period. The RFP now represents the next step in a formal process: all information provided to the suppliers in the market research in relation to our anticipated requirements, or about the Library generally, has been either included in the RFP or in the case of general information, is openly accessible from our website at http://www.nla.gov.au.
Q.14 Which vendors do you use for your physical storage?
A.14.We primarily use EMC Clariion SAN disk storage, with some SUN/Oracle 7410 storage. We also use StorageTek, SUN and Oracle tape libraries and LTO4 tape drives. Please note physical storage systems are not in scope for replacement.
Friday 5 August 2011
Q.15 Could you please provide an indication of the quantities of materials itemised at B5.1? An approximate total number of objects - with an object being, for example, a single discrete document, image, book or item - in the collection would be useful.
A.15. The indicative number of items in the Library’s digital collection - by collection type - as of July 2011, is:
|Collection Type||Number of Items|
|Books and serials||4,414|
|Number of newspaper titles||157|
|Total number of issues||491,364|
|Total number of pages||5, 056,858|
|Total number of articles||52,088,818|
|Web Archive (curated)|
|Number of archived titles||28,443|
|Number of archived instances*||66,609|
|Born Digital content from physical carriers (e.g. CD-ROM, DVD etc)||1,121|
* An archived instance is a single snapshot or copy of a title that has been added to the archive. Titles are often copied into the archive more than once to capture changing content, for example, when serial titles add new issues. Each new copy of a title is referred to as an 'archived instance'.
The number of files in the archive, stored on the Library's Digital Object Storage System (DOSS), by material type, as of July 2011, is:
|Material Type||Number of Files|
|Images (digitised and born digital)||17,433,004|
|Sound (digitised and born digital)||147,057|
|Web archive (curated)||119,467,313|
|Web archive (whole domain harvest)||3,781,473,205|
|Born digital content from physical carriers (e.g. CD-ROM, DVD etc)||589,030|
The archive comprises:
- Image and sound files including digital originals, masters, co-masters, and delivery derivatives;
- Text files of Finding Aids, summaries, transcripts, print derivatives and related metadata files; and
- Web archive (curated) includes harvested and metadata files.
The metadata files of the digitised Newspapers are currently stored in the databases, not on DOSS, hence are not included in the table.
Q.16 Would it be possible to extend the deadline for submission of proposals by one week?
A.16. The Library will not be extending the deadline as we have established a schedule for the evaluation and delivery of the project more broadly.
Q.17 Are you accepting RFP responses from international organisations?
A.17.Yes, RFP responses are open to and welcomed from both Australian and international organisations.
Monday 8 August 2011
Q.18 Is there a set format to follow for individual responses to the RFP requirements as detailed in section B Statement of Outcomes?
A.18 In terms of the Statement of Outcomes, there is no set format to follow for individual responses to the RFP requirements, nor is there a requirement to provide a response against each of the numbered paragraphs within the Statement of Outcomes (please also see the response to Q.3 above). However to assist with responses, respondents are encouraged to complete the Section D Proforma Proposal as a minimum. This ensures the addressing of the Conditions of Participation, selection criteria and pricing information. It is for this reason that the RFP has been presented in Word as well as a PDF format.
Q.19 Is there a preference for set responses to be provided for questions set forth – for example Fully supported, Partially supported, Not Supported - followed by a detailed description to help with your response evaluation matrix?
A.19 As per the above Q 18 answer, respondents are encouraged to complete Section D, though the Proforma is not intended to be exhaustive. It should be clear from submissions how the outcomes specified in B1.1 are either to be delivered or not delivered, as the case may be. Innovative ways of delivering the outcomes are encouraged. Respondents are to ensure they provide sufficient information in their Proposals to enable the Library to undertake a full evaluation of the Proposal ie as described at Section C of the RFP document.
Q.20 Is there a limit to the page size or length of Proposals?
A.20 As long as there is sufficient information to enable the Library to undertake a full evaluation, there is no limit to either the page size or the length of Proposals.
Tuesday 9 August 2011
Q.21 How many users will be accessing the system?
A.21 Please see the table under paragraph 139, in section B3.3 (Performance Requirements), which details the number of concurrent system users the system must support at any point in time, broken up into system components, and covering both internal and external users.
Q.22 Is there a requirement for high availability?
A.22 Yes, high availability is a requirement of the systems.