Faxon's SC-10 system & SERIALST discussions Birdie MacLennan 20 Aug 1992 03:14 UTC
4 messages, 88 lines: -------------------------- Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 13:33:00 EDT From: ELEANOR COOK <COOKEI@APPSTATE.BITNET> Subject: Re: Faxon's SC-10 system & SERIALST discussions In reply to Gaele's response to my reply to Martha Kellogg (good grief!) Thanks, Gaele, that is nice to know. My concern merely is to keep the "nitty gritty" to those of us to who need to talk SC-10ese. SC-10 is a system that was developed long before current standards we now know and enjoy; much of the jargon that goes along with it may be unintelligible and possibly irritating to non SC-10 users. I don't see NOTIS, GEAC, Innovative Interfaces, DRA or other specific system vendor questions on SERIALST. And I don't expect to; they all have their own groups. Sharing <general> news or questions about any system is fine, but I would rather get into the details with users of any given system somewhere else besides SERIALST. I hope this makes sense; it is not an attempt to squelch any discussion! Eleanor Cook Serials Librarian Appalachian State University Boone, NC 28608 cookei@appstate.bitnet cookei@conrad.appstate.edu ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 14:48:21 -0400 From: "Erika C. Linke" <el08+%ANDREW.CMU.EDU@CARNEGIE.BITNET> Subject: Re: Faxon's SC-10 system & SERIALST discussions I concur with Gaele Gillespie's comments about keeping the discussion about SC-10 migration on SERIALST. These are the same reasons I had for keeping the discussion here. -- Erika Linke Head, Collections & Access Carnegie Mellon University ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 15:24:00 EDT From: SMURDEN@VCUVAX.BITNET Subject: Re: Faxon's SC-10 system & SERIALST discussions I'd like to echo Gaele's comment concerning Eleanor's suggestion - please keep the discussion on SERIALST. Although we are currently an SC-10 library, and are not planning to convert to the new Faxon system (we're going to NOTIS for serials check-in), I too like to know what is going on with these kinds of decisions, who's doing what, and what the reasons are for doing it. Besides, as long as the postings are correctly identified, we can all just skip those topics that we don't want to read. Thanks. Steve Murden Va. Commonwealth University smurden@vcuvax.bitnet ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 22:13 EDT From: Birdie MacLennan <BMACLENN@UVMVM.BITNET> Points from both sides of this argument are well taken. There *are* numerous other forums to discuss systems specific questions (e.g., NOTIS-L, DRA, GEAC, Innovative Interfaces, and probably others that I haven't kept up with ...). On the other hand, SERIALST has a broad scope that pertains to almost any aspect of serials processing in libraries. I enjoy (and learn from) hearing about what others are encountering in using various serials systems, and often have found direct answers here to my NOTIS-related systems questions that have have spared me from the NOTIS list, which can be very technical and systems-persons oriented. Afterall, we do tend to focus on the serials aspects of these systems! My sense is that if a topic gets too tedious, irritating, or redundant for subscribers, they generally voice their opinion and move to turn the issue(s) elsewhere or to private correspondence. Also, there are several vendors who subscribe to SERIALST, and my sense is that this is a good forum to make your voice and concerns known to a broad spectrum of readers. Birdie MacLennan Serials Cataloger University of Vermont