ERM Implementation Team Minutes 5/31/2006

 

Present:  Baia, Callahan, Culshaw, Fong, Gobrecht, Helgoth, Jobe, Wakimoto,Wicht

 

Workflow:

 

  • Helgoth reported that Allison and Kendra have created brief resource records for packages that have a direct correlation to entries in SS, for example ABI Inform Global.  This will facilitate coverage loads once SS MARC records have been loaded.  They’re now working on brief records for packages that don’t have a one-to-one correspondence between the bib record and holdings in SS.  Examples of this include incomplete publisher packages.  To create these records, they’re using the 730 tracings and title shown in SS.  The next phase will be to create records for “orphans” such as Nature, Science, and the New England Journal of Medicine that specific license, access, and use restrictions.  After a brief discussion it was tentatively decided that the Libraries would NOT create resource records for the remaining “orphan” titles that don’t have a license.  In order to load MARC records from SS, however, at some point in the future the Libraries should send SS a spreadsheet listing all license-free titles that are stand-alone subscriptions.
  • In order to keep track for workflow issues, it was suggested that E-Code 1 could be used to track status of a resource record from the Acquisitions perspective, E-Code-2 would be used to track cataloging status.  Helgoth will propose a list of values for E-Code 1.  Gobrecht (and others?) will propose a list of values for E-Code 2.  These should be communicated to the list so that Jobe can update the appropriate definition document.
  • Roberta Brown-Jones will create a distribution list in Outlook for the full ERM group.
  • The latest release from III includes a patch for the breach cure field in the license record.  Helgoth will update the 15 or so license records and Jobe will update the documentation.
  • Jobe and Helgoth reported on their work with a CU-specific license worksheet modeled on information presented at the NASIC preconference on mapping license terms. Helgoth will continue to test its usability. 

 

Coverage loads:

 

  • After viewing the sample set of 500 SS MARC records, the coverage load group identified one MARC tag (037) to eliminate from the records.  She’s asked SS for a set of records for JSTOR and BioOne.  Delivery of this record batch may have been delayed by the fact that CU-B has yet to signed license or pay the invoice for the service.  Fong will send an e-mail to the vendor.
  • Wakimoto reported that she had gotten some excellent information from Dao Gong of Michigan State University, including a suggestion to change the 856 field to a 956 field in the loader so that coverage holdings do not show up twice.  Baia raised the question of what happens in Prospector which led to a brief discussion of whether or not to send SS records to Prospector.  Baia agreed to look at those issues.
  • Culshaw suggested that CU-B might want to use the e-book loader for SS MARC records since it seems to have worked in the test phase.  Modifications to 856 and 956 fields could be handled later using global update.
  • The coverage-load subgroup is eager to load the MARC records so that they can start playing around with coverage loads in ERM. After discussion, it was decided to load all of the SS MARC records at once, but to do coverage loads on a database-by-database basis.

 

Public Display Issues:

 

  • The subgroup looked at a bib record and associated records for Ambio on the staging server.  Callahan cautioned that the recent installation of WebPacPro modified the look of records on the staging server.  Many design issues still need to be worked out.
  • Callahan reported on her conversations with CSU.  According to them, the webpubdef controls the display of fields above an imaginary “fold” in resource records.  Wwwoptions controls the display of fields below the “fold”.  The public display group still needs to make recommendations on which fields to display.
  • The question of whether or not a library can choose to display different fields in the catalog itself and in the A-Z and subject lists remains unresolved.  Wicht agreed to pursue this question with III in a closely-related call that she still has open.
  • After discussing the problems posed by a “MARC” view of resource records, Callahan agreed to send a message to the III list about suppressing the MARC display for this record type.
  • The public display group would like additional members.  Fong and Wakimoto agreed to ask others on behalf of the committee.

 

The next full committee meeting is scheduled for July 5.