[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] ***SPAM*** Re: Call numbers in Evergreen

[Sharp, Chris]

Hi Don, 

> Please pardon my ignorance, but it sounds like Evergreen requires keying in every call number prefix. Is that true? Wouldn't that be an unnecessary extra burden for the data entry person? 


The call number label field was originally designed as a free-text field to meet the requirements of PINES, which has *many* call number schemes that change often. I think for our libraries, the flexibility of being able to change the call number labels easily outweighs the burden of data entry, but this email thread may lead to an effort towards a more standardized option if that makes sense for other Evergreen user agencies. 


Chris 

Chris Sharp 
PINES Program Manager 
Georgia Public Library Service 
1800 Century Place, Suite 150 
Atlanta, Georgia 30345 
(404) 235-7147 
csharp at georgialibraries.org 
http://pines.georgialibraries.org/ 




From: "Don Butterworth" <don.butterworth at asburyseminary.edu> 
To: "Evergreen Discussion Group" <open-ils-general at list.georgialibraries.org> 
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 5:26:23 AM 
Subject: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] ***SPAM*** Re: Call numbers in Evergreen 



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dan Scott" <dan at coffeecode.net> 
To: "Evergreen Discussion Group" <open-ils-general at list.georgialibraries.org> 
Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2010 9:36:40 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern 
Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Call numbers in Evergreen 

<snip> 

Interesting. In the past we used prefixes on our call numbers to 
identify which library holds a given book, but we've done away with them 
to avoid messing up call number sorting in the loverly shelf browse. The 
idea of having non-sorting prefixes and suffixes is intriguing - 
although I wonder if it would make more sense to work out a programmatic 
way to tell the spine label editor to generate a given prefix or suffix 
when printing a spine label, rather than manually entering that 
information into new fields all the time. 

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 
In our former system, call number prefixes were assigned based on a parameter set in a Collection Code definition area. In other words, the collection code ATSREF defined the call number prefix prefix Ref., ACREF also defined the call number prefix Ref. This work great both for gathering statistics and applying the prefix. It was a set it then forget it operation. Our current system "tries" to do the same thing, but it does not work as seamlessly. 

Please pardon my ignorance, but it sounds like Evergreen requires keying in every call number prefix. Is that true? Wouldn't that be an unnecessary extra burden for the data entry person? 

Don (the lurker) 

Don Butterworth 
Faculty Associate / Librarian III 
B.L. Fisher Library 
Asbury Theological Seminary 
(859) 858-2227 
don.butterworth at asburyseminary.edu 




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://libmail.georgialibraries.org/pipermail/open-ils-general/attachments/20100728/a0691fba/attachment.htm