[OPEN-ILS-DEV] URI scoping in Evergreen

[Justin Hopkins]

Hi Galen,

Here in Missouri many public libraries participate in a group purchase 
of electronic resources through Overdrive - a program called molib2go. 
(molib2go.org)

All molib2go member libraries have access to the same set of resources 
and they share the available copies. It is also possible for a library 
to purchase additional copies of individual titles that are only 
available to their patrons. So, while the entire group may share one 
copy of "The Hop" if a particular library wants to ensure their patrons 
have access to this must read item, they can purchase one or more 
additional copies.

Overdrive makes the groups MARC records available on an FTP server each 
month and we have a process that downloads the records, adds $9s for 
each Missouri Evergreen library who subscribes to molib2go, and adds 
them to the database.

The premium set of records all have different 856 urls, so when we 
receive those from the individual libraries we add the single $9s and 
then attach that as an additional 856 to the record from the group load. 
The result is that a library who does subscribe both as a group and with 
added copies for their library only would see two 856 links in the catalog.

Justin

On 7/15/14, 7:59 PM, Galen Charlton wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 6:17 PM, Liam Whalen
> <liam.whalen at bc.libraries.coop> wrote:
>> On Jul 15, 2014, at 2:49 PM, Mike Rylander <mrylander at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> * If yes to the previous question, would this extend to copy visibility?
>> No, this is strictly for URIs.  I believe, because copies are physical, they are much more
>> naturally assigned to the OUs that need to have control of them.  URIs, in Sitka’s case,
>> may be assigned at various levels depending on how a library or system needs to
>> conceptual organize ownership.
> Are there cases, either at Sitka or in other consortia following this
> discussion, where LURI visibility of shared electronic resources do
> not map cleanly to the OU hierarchy at all?  For example, do two
> libraries who have no relationship other than membership in Sitka ever
> go in on an eresource package together?
>
> Regards,
>
> Galen