[Evergreen-catalogers] How to explain the display of "empty records"?

Wed Oct 5 10:18:40 EDT 2022

PINES catalogers are instructed to first search their library system so
that they find any existing matching records within their system. And to
then search all of PINES. Having empty, potentially matching records show
up in this search means they don't have to do that subsequent all PINES
search.

Having the color coding for bib records hidden from the public OPAC meant
that public services staff knew to ignore those records when assisting
patrons. It was an extremely helpful tool for all staff since it indicated
to public services staff the record was likely not available to patrons and
to cataloging staff that they might need to explore why it wasn't visible.
We got a lot of complaints from public service and cataloging staff when
the color coding was dropped. And requests still for it to return.

As to explaining to public service staff. I tell them that it helps their
colleagues do their job and they understand that and know to ignore records
with 0/0 holdings.

We also run a script to delete empty bibs in the database for more than 30
days. We also recently cleaned up empty records that had creeped in because
of an error in the script.

J. Elaine Hardy, PINES and Collaborative Projects Manager
------------------------------

Georgia Public Library Service

2872 Woodcock Blvd., Suite 250 | Atlanta, GA 30341

(404) 235-7128 | ehardy at georgialibraries.org

(404) 548-4241 | Cell

<https://www.facebook.com/georgialibraries>
<https://www.twitter.com/georgialibs>
<https://www.instagram.com/georgialibraries/>

Join our email list <http://georgialibraries.org/subscription> for stories
of Georgia libraries making an impact in our communities.

It does not do to leave a live dragon out of your calculations, if you live
near him. *— J.R.R. Tolkien*

On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 at 3:01 PM Thomsen, Elizabeth via Evergreen-catalogers <
evergreen-catalogers at list.evergreen-ils.org> wrote:

> Is it really a feature that empty bibs show up when searching at the
> library level?  It's hard to see the benefit here -- searching the
> Pleasantville Library limits search results to titles owned by
> Pleasantville and also titles owned by nobody. What's the point of that?
>
> We deal with this by running a script to delete empty bibs after two weeks
> -- libraries know they have to add items within that time period before or
> they will automatically get deleted.
>
> On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 at 2:36 PM Mary Llewellyn via Evergreen-catalogers <
> evergreen-catalogers at list.evergreen-ils.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi Erica,
>>
>> In our case, none of the reported bibs has an 856. These are records we
>> loaded at the request of another library, in which they haven't gotten
>> around to adding their own items.
>>
>> When we first migrated to Evergreen, the empty bibs were colored in gray,
>> and that caused no end of complaints. We were relieved when the coloring
>> was turned off. It drew less attention to the empty bibs and people calmed
>> down.
>>
>> Our public services staff aren't looking to do any cataloging, so seeing
>> the empty bibs, colored in or not, is not helpful to them. Our acq staff
>> members are adding an "on order" copy to the records when they activate
>> their purchase orders, so there's no need from them to place holds on empty
>> bibs. Their display in a library-based search instead of CONS serves no
>> useful purpose to us.
>>
>> I don't know if there's been an influx of new staff first running into
>> these, or if the angular catalog is making them more prominent, displaying
>> them at the top of search results, but I need to write up an FAQ for our
>> librarians that I can point at every time we get another complaint. I'd
>> like to say something more detailed than "it's a feature, not a bug."
>>
>> Mary
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 at 2:17 PM Erica Rohlfs <erica.rohlfs at equinoxoli.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Mary,
>>>
>>> I don't know if I can be of much help. I see that you're already aware
>>> of Wish List - Add color coding when there are no holdings
>>> <https://bugs.launchpad.net/evergreen/+bug/1966342> so I'm just listing
>>> it here for others who are following the discussion. I agree with Elaine
>>> that having the empty bib records, a.k.a. shadowed records color coded was
>>> once a very helpful feature. I also agree that some mechanism to filter out
>>> the truly empty bibs would be a good feature, too. Some of the confusion
>>> also stems from the fact that, if there is an associated 856 subfield 9 on
>>> the record, it's not considered empty. This is one of the factors that
>>> consortia consider when removing the e-resources from the catalog (only one
>>> factor, I know there are many others). Some libraries do filter on Group
>>> Formats/Editions to consolidate results, where possible. But, this doesn't
>>> answer the question of why the records show up in the results :-) You've
>>> noted that there are catalogers' considerations for retrieving empty bibs.
>>> Really, the only circulation reason that stands out in my mind is that,
>>> with the permission to override HIGH_LEVEL_HOLD_HAS_NO_COPIES, staff
>>> can place holds on empty bibs. I don't know how many use cases there are
>>> for it, maybe Acquisitions and Collections Librarians in the community have
>>> specific use cases. I'd love to learn more about them.
>>>
>>> Thank You,
>>> Erica
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 at 1:27 PM Mary Llewellyn via Evergreen-catalogers <
>>> evergreen-catalogers at list.evergreen-ils.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> I could use some advice.
>>>>
>>>> We have our catalogers use CONS as their search library so they can
>>>> find all records, with and without items, when they need to catalog their
>>>> own items.
>>>>
>>>> However, the public services staff use their own library as a search
>>>> library, and that's where we run into staff confusion.
>>>>
>>>> When they run into a bib record with no items, they report that to us
>>>> as an error.
>>>> When they are searching in their own library, they expect to only
>>>> retrieve records with their items.
>>>>
>>>> I'm trying to come up with a succinct explanation for why they see
>>>> those records. I do assure them that their public does not see the "empty"
>>>> records, that they only appear in the staff catalog. Can someone share with
>>>> me the official reason for why these records display?
>>>>
>>>> I wish there were some way to prevent them from coming up in their
>>>> searches.
>>>> --
>>>> Mary Llewellyn
>>>> Database Manager
>>>> Bibliomation, Inc.
>>>> 24 Wooster Ave.
>>>> Waterbury, CT 06708
>>>> mllewell at biblio.org
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Evergreen-catalogers mailing list
>>>> Evergreen-catalogers at list.evergreen-ils.org
>>>>
>>>> http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/evergreen-catalogers
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Erica Rohlfs, MLIS, PMP
>>> Senior Implementation Project Manager
>>> Equinox Open Library Initiative
>>> erica.rohlfs at equinoxOLI.org
>>> https://equinoxOLI.org
>>> phone: 877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457)
>>> direct: 770-709-5572
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Mary Llewellyn
>> Database Manager
>> Bibliomation, Inc.
>> 24 Wooster Ave.
>> Waterbury, CT 06708
>> mllewell at biblio.org
>> _______________________________________________
>> Evergreen-catalogers mailing list
>> Evergreen-catalogers at list.evergreen-ils.org
>>
>> http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/evergreen-catalogers
>>
>
>
> --
> Elizabeth B. Thomsen
> Member Services Manager
> NOBLE: North of Boston Library Exchange
> Danvers, Mass.
> www.noblenet.org
> _______________________________________________
> Evergreen-catalogers mailing list
> Evergreen-catalogers at list.evergreen-ils.org
> http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/evergreen-catalogers
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.evergreen-ils.org/pipermail/evergreen-catalogers/attachments/20221005/68660ac6/attachment-0001.htm>