At my university we are in a transient situation
where our online catalog says that we have the electronic as well as the
print, but doesn't give the relevant years available  electronically,
which are only on a separate list. We are getting this data into the
catalog as fast as possible, because the patrons get very confused.

I do think there is a purpose--at least for now--in continuing a list that
gives only the electronic, which is best done as an automatic derivative
of the information in the catalog. Cornell, for example, has a very nice
way of doing this.

David Goodman, Princeton University Biology Library
dgoodman@princeton.edu            609-258-3235

On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, Tracey DeLillo wrote:

> I am in need of some input/advice regarding Holdings Lists for
> periodicals.  I am in the process of revising our current Periodicals
> Holdings List, and had decided to create 2 separate lists: one for print
> and microfilm holdings (i.e. items housed IN the library), and one for
> full-text electronic holdings.  Our old PHL had combined everything into
> one massive list, which was nicely and expensively professionally printed,
> and was largely obsolete within a month due to changes in databases and
> other online availability.  The other problem I encounter daily with
> this comprehensive list, is that patrons come to my office to complain
> that, for example, "Private Placement Reporter" isn't on the shelves,
> because they don't notice that it says "ELECTRONIC, LEXIS-NEXIS"
> underneath instead of "PERIODICAL SHELVES".  These are just two of my
> favorite reasons for deciding to split the lists.  Some of my coworkers,
> however, have concerns about my plan.  They feel that the patrons won't
> like having to look 2 separate places to see where they can get an
> article.  They think it will be time consuming and confusing.  They are
> afraid that patrons will be misled regarding our holdings and will be
> disgruntled, not to mention an expected increase in unnecessary I.L.L.
> requests for materials we really do have access to.
>
> I am now in a quandry.  How do other libraries format their PHL's?  Are
> electronic sources listed?  Are they combined with print, or listed
> separately?  Are the PHL's available in hardcopy, or are they only online?
>
> Any input will be greatly appreciated.  Feel free to email me directly, or
> post to the list if others think this is of broad interest.
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Tracey DeLillo
> Serials Librarian
> Texas A&M - Corpus Christi
> <tdelillo@FALCON.TAMUCC.EDU>