ERM Minutes

8/2/2006

 

Present:  Callahan, Cronin, Culshaw, Fong, Gobrecht, Graber, Helgoth, Jobe, Lamboy, Moeller, Wakimoto,Wicht

 

After discussion the committee agreed to present a Q & A session on ERM and Serials Solutions for the FSDC.  Advance preparation would be limited to a short overview.  Fong and Jobe agreed to work on a short summary that could be sent to the Norlin list.

 

Reports from subgroups:

 

Workflow

Fong raised question about softlinking of order records to the resource record.  With so-called “Big Deal” packages, the Libraries gains access to all titles included in a publisher package regardless of subscription status.  Examples include Elsevier, Wiley, and Springer.  Subscription details for individual titles are noted in the order records.   Acquisitions codes “K” for kid (meaning subscribed and paid for under a large package) and “U” for bonus or free titles (meaning included in a package but not subscribed to).   Although Helgoth believes it may be possible to softlink order records using lists, many on the committee believe that the amount of manual labor necessary to link and unlink makes this a potentially burdensome concept.  It was suggested that saved search strategies could be used to generate lists as needed for statistical reports and other purposes.

 

Coverage Load

The Libraries received a file about 25,000 full MARC records from SS.  The match point for coverage loads is the SS control number.  For the remaining 22,000 titles, SS uses a ssjb number for its brief records that is generated on the fly.  For these titles the match points are the title and ISSN.  It’s thought that this will primarily affect content in aggregator databases.  Within providers the percentage of brief and full bib records loaded may vary significantly.   The coverage load group plans to do coverage loads provider by provider, selecting the most stable for its initial work. 

 

Fong agreed to ask for an extension of the SS trial so that the coverage load group can experiment with the records.  They may need to tweak the loader a little for optimal results. 

 

The coverage load group agreed to work first on the 10 databases that the Libraries identified as candidates for III’s WebBridge configuration service.  Testing of the configuration service can’t proceed until coverage loads for these 10 databases are complete. 

 

In order to minimize patron confusion, the coverage load group will either bring the SS records into the system in a suppressed mode or suppress them with a global update immediately after they have been loaded.  It might be necessary to unsuppress records for testing purposes for brief intervals.

 

Public Display

The committee reviewed the recommendations of the public display group that were originally presented to the full committee at its July meeting.  After discussion, the full committee suggested that “Resource Title” should be changed to “Database Title.”  “Alternate Resource Title” should be changed to “Other Title.”  Callahan will make these changes to the webpubdef file and Jobe will update the subgroups recommendations to reflect these changes.

 

The other recommendations of the committee were accepted without change.  Cataloging and Systems will consider the implications of the indexing recommendations at its retreat on re-indexing Chinook. 

 

Although Wakimoto received a reply to her follow-up query Chinook’s available indexes from III, its meaning is unclear to her.  Wakimoto and Culshaw will look at this together.