Re: Integrating resource cataloging question julie su 24 Feb 2006 18:28 UTC


  Please please ask PCC to follow up on the proposal of Provider-Neutrl Record for online integrating resources.  I have been waiting for the fruition of this proposal since last spring!    The databases are growing like mushroom now, and so are the providers.  Instead of finding multiple existing records in bibliographic utility, we often cannot a record that matches the provider we have license to.  Moreover, we often have to replace the catalog record for the online databse simply because our contract for the databse is changed from one provider to another one.


  Les Hawkins <lhaw@LOC.GOV> wrote:
  In August 2005 the following proposal was sent to several lists for
comment. If I recall, we did not receive many replies. If there is
interest in this idea, I can ask the PCC leadership to consider setting up
a group to look into endorsing/pursuing this.

Proposal for a Provider-Neutral Record for Online Integrating Resources

As a follow-up to a discussion at the CONSER Operations meeting in May, I
invite a wider discussion on a provider neutral approach to cataloging
integrating resources. The CONSER meeting discussion summary is available

This would be similar to the aggregator neutral cataloging policy for
E-Serials. Peter Fletcher presented this topic at the Operations
meeting and drafted the proposal below. Please read through the proposal
below and respond to the list or contact Peter directly with your
comments. Please excuse the cross-postings.

Specific proposal: establish a provider-neutral record policy, similar to
the CONSER aggregator-neutral policy, for online integrating resources,
with the description based, if possible, on an original source of content
such as the original publisher, or academic society or association. As
with the CONSER policy, the record would contain information applicable to
all provider versions, but information on the provider would only appear
in citing which version the description was based on.

Discussion: some online integrating resources, normally indexes/databases,
have a single source, but they often have several service providers.

Some examples:

Medline (source: National Library of Medicine; also available via OCLC,
EBSCO, OVID, Cambridge Scientific Abstracts, etc.)

PAIS international (source Cambridge scientific abstracts; also available
also via OCLC, OVID/Silverplatter, etc.?)

Art index/fulltext/abstracts (source Wilson; also available via OCLC
FirstSearch, others?)

Sociological abstracts (source CSA; also available via OVID/Silverplatter,
OCLC FirsSearch, etc.?)

CINAHL (source: CINAHL Information Systems; also available via OCLC
FirstSearch, OVID/Silverplatter)

Education index/full-text/abstracts (source Wilson; also available via
OCLC FirstSearch)

ERIC is also a government source, but is available via many
interfaces/providers such as EBSCO, OCLC FirstSearch, etc.

Presently, in the utilities, there are many records representing these
kinds of titles, generally with each based on a different provider, even
though the essential content is the same. Are we and library patrons well
served by providing these separate records? If we had one record
representing these titles, it would save cataloging time when our
libraries change provider packages or acquire new ones and thus better
serve the patron with faster maintenance and acquisition of these
records. Also, if a library has more than one version of such a title,
having one OPAC record with multiple URLs might serve patrons better than
multiple records that contain subtle descriptive differences.

Some specific differences between provider versions could be noted as
such: "Some providers have ". Also, ISSN policy works in favor of a
provider-neutral approach, since only one ISSN will be assigned to only
one record that represents a particular electronic integrating resource
title. And, as with CONSER, for record consolidation, the 936 could be
used to indicate which records will be deleted.

Peter will be compiling responses to the proposal, please contact him
directly if you intend to reply off list. I will be out of the office
Aug. 8-19. Thanks!

Les Hawkins
CONSER Coordinator
202 707-5185

Peter V. Fletcher
Serials & Electronic Resources Catalog Librarian,
Bibliographer for Germanic and Russian Studies

Howard-Tilton Memorial Library
Tulane University
7001 Freret Street
New Orleans, LA 70118 (504) 862-8582
Fax: (504) 862-8556

fletcher at

On Wed, 22 Feb 2006, Steven C Shadle wrote:

> Nancy -- My understanding is that PCC has not endorsed
> aggregator-neutral practice for integrating resources. Because PCC
> policy is OCLC policy, I would assume at this point you would create a
> separate record (sigh). Others who are more in touch with PCC
> decision-making might have a better sense of any decision status.
> --Steve
> Steve Shadle/Serials Access Librarian *****
> University of Washington Libraries *** Phone: (206) 685-3983
> Seattle, WA 98195-2900 * Fax: (206) 685-8743
> On Wed, 22 Feb 2006, Nancy Chaffin wrote:
> > Hi all
> >
> > I understand how the aggregator neutral record works for serials, but is there
> > a similar rule/practice I am missing for integrating resources, specifically
> > abstracting/indexing databases that are offered on different platforms?
> >
> > Example:
> > Our library subscribes to Music Index Online directly from the publisher,
> > Harmonie Park Press. However, we are moving our subscription to the Ebsco
> > version. There is no catalog record for the resource listing Ebsco as the
> > publisher or with an Ebsco URL. Should I use the record for Harmonie, or
> > create a new one for Ebsco?
> >
> > TIA,
> >
> > Nancy
> > --
> > Nancy J. Chaffin
> > Metadata Librarian
> > Colorado State University Libraries
> > Fort Collins, CO 80523-1019
> >
> > voice: 970.491.1847
> > fax: 970.491.4661
> > e-mail:
> >

Julie Su
Digital Resources/Serials Librarian
Library and Information Services
San Diego State University
5500 Campanile Drive, San Diego, CA 92182-8050
619 594-0904 (work) 619 594-4093 (fax)


 What are the most popular cars? Find out at Yahoo! Autos