ERM Minutes



Present:  Baia, Callahan, Cronin, Gobrecht, Helgoth, Holladay, Jobe


Public Display Issues: 

Prior to the meeting Wakimoto alerted the group to the fact that pricing and payment information was appearing in the public display for resource records.  Since nothing in the webpubdef or wwwoptions specifies inclusion of that data, Meredith will contact III about the problem.  The field code used for pricing and payment info is “S” in a variable length field of the resource record.  Because resource records are now appearing in the public interface because of coverage loads, Helgoth will move all pricing and payment info to internal notes until we get the problem resolved.


Subject guides and ERM: 

Once ERM is implemented, the bibliographers will no longer be able to control the ordering of resources in the results display. In addition, the descriptions will no longer be visible from a single page.  The group devised a potential solution.  When appropriate, it would be possible to create a resource record for individual subject guides.  For these records the Libraries would to establish a uniform title format.  To force the subject guide to appear first in a subject-based list of resources, each title would start with an asterisk.  For example, *History Subject Guide would appear first in the results list for history.  Callahan will clone Thea’s history guide and Jobe will create a test resource record for discussion with groups such as the bibliographers and others. 


Tutorials or help files and ERM:

Currently the Find Articles and More includes links to streaming video tutorials and pages from the “…How do I…” portion of the website.  Jobe modified the description of the resource record for Refworks to include a link to “…How do I…” page.  After discussion the committee recommended using the description for links to user guides, tutorials, and other materials of this nature.  Jobe reported that she had been unable to link directly to the streaming video tutorial because of the presence of a string of “20%” characters in the URL.  Because it may be possible to reformat the URLs in a usable format for ERM this may not be an insoluble problem.


The code to include is <br><br> <a href=”URL for tutorial”>Title of Link</a>  The two <br>s separate the link to the tutorial from the main body of the description.





Use of fields by Serials Cataloging:

Gobrecht asked the group to designate Resource Code 2 (a fixed field) to track cataloging status.  The code would be renamed “Cat Status”


The proposed values are:

Default u = ‘unevaluated’ (not looked at yet by cataloging) The default code would be worked into the default template.

s = ‘subjects added’ (added by cat but bibliographers have not yet looked it over)

c = ‘completed’ (fully evaluated by both cat and bibliographers)


Extended comments can be added to an internal notes field.  There is no limit to the number of internal notes that can be included in each resource record. The group approved this recommendation.  Jobe will ask Culshaw to make the changes.  


Since cataloging and acquisitions have also proposed additional uses, Jobe suggested that we should take a comprehensive look at the issue. 


Coverage loads:

Moeller updated the group on the progress of the coverage loads.  He and Wakimoto would like to complete the loading of both the updated SS MARC records and the brief records before doing additional coverage loads.  He reported small problems with the load for Science Direct.  These exceptions will have to be investigated on a title-by-title basis.


Recommendations on the creation of single/multiple resource records. 

Wicht proposed the following criteria for the creation of multiple resource records:


1. Resource has its own license (or addendum that varies in some way from
the "parent" license)

2. Resource has unique subscription information, such as start and end date, and/or payment (fund is different)

3. (Less important) Resource has its own usage statistics that we would like to track

4. We would like the resource to show up on its own in the subject and A-Z lists depending on patron needs.


Helgoth reported that she had created separate resource records in ERM for the various JSTOR packages as a test.  Moeller had questions about how the Libraries might link to the main record for coverage loads and whether or not it would be difficult to separate for loads.  At this time the effect on coverage loads is unknown.  Further discussion when the complete committee is able to meet.


WebBridge update: 

Holloway read the following e-mail update for Wicht who was unable to attend:


Heather is still working with Ann at Innovative to get the ten resources set
up.  The ten resources are:

1. JSTOR Arts & Sciences I
2. Gale Infotrac OneFile
3. ScienceDirect (journals -- Freedom collection)

4. netLibrary

5. EBSCOHost
Business Source Premier

6. IEL (IEEE/IEE Electronic Library) -- This one is pending, as Triple I doesn't know yet if they can set it up for us.  I may have to substitute something else for this.  If so, I will substitute SpringerLink (883 journals)
7. H.W. Wilson Humanities Full Text
8. ILLiad (this obviously does not require a coverage load or a resource/license record)

9. BioOne

10. CSA SAGE Communication Studies

Heather has sent this list to Linda and to Sara (to ensure the creation of
resource and license records for these) and to Paul and Jina to ensure that
coverage loads would be done for these resources.  Once we have all of these
things done on our end, we should be able to finish up the configuration
service and Heather will be able to do a demo of how it works (in its

After that point, the WebBridge group will need to focus on doing coverage
loads to build our repository of full-text.  ***The group will meet to
prioritize the order of resources for which coverage loads will be done.***
Once that is complete or at least well underway, Sara and Heather will work
on ensuring that each resource has a proper record, license record, contact
record, and then we can set them up as origin and/or target resources in
WebBridge.  At the same time, the WebBridge group will be meeting to discuss
public display issues.