Email list hosting service & mailing list manager

Re: holdings conversion (fwd) Marcia Tuttle 21 Mar 1993 06:42 UTC

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1993 15:17:51 -0800
From: Mitch Turitz <turitz@SFSUVAX1.SFSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: holdings conversion (fwd)

At San Francisco State University we are currently converting our serials
and periodicals into the USMARC format for holdings as supported by the
Geac Advance serials check-in system.

We also inquired about tape-loading the information and found that it is
not available.  Even if the pub. pattern information was available, we
would still have to manually go into each title to decide on the claim
codes and receipt delays for EVERY title.  This is unavoidable as each
library will want to decide for themselves what period of time should
elapse before a claim is generated for overdue issues.

Another thing which has to be decided on individually is what the vendor
codes, funding codes, and even selector codes are for each title.  That
information would not be available from shared databases.  Such
information is necessary if the system is going to check the allocations
of funds for each selector and determine if a selector/fund is overspent!

Although we are just beginning the project the observations I can give you
so far are:

Inputting of publication pattern data for titles is VERY labor intensive.
It is comparable to retrospective conversion of bibliographic data for
serials and, in many cases, can even take longer then original cataloging.

Do NOT consider trying to set up check-in patterns for the ENTIRE history
of a serial.  Just start off from the most current issue(s) and change the
pub. patterns as you receive new issues with changed frequencies.  Putting
in the whole history of a periodical is not worth it.  Your system should
have some way of generating a summary holdings note where you can explain
in free text previously checked-in issues.

I recommend having both the check-in cards (with the fund codes and
selector as well) and a recent issue of the title in hand when creating
the check-in record.

DO NOT expect to reduce staff workloads by implementing ANY automated
system.  I have been working with library automation for MANY years and
have yet to see any example in any of the libraries where I have worked,
of automation saving staff, reducing workloads, or lowering overall
budgetary requirements.

Your local system MUST have adequate documentation BEFORE you can begin
such an undertaking.  The need for good documentation must NEVER be
underestimated!  In extreme cases, making your own documentation is
preferable to waiting for documentation which is "still being worked on".

-- Mitch Turitz
   Serials Librarian
   San Francisco State University