[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] MARC for electronic resources

[Mary Llewellyn]

This sounds very interesting.

Does it work so that a  bib will appear in some libraries' public 
catalogs and not in others? For instance, we have 30 libraries in our 
consortium of 70+ that subscribe to Overdrive downloadable audiobooks 
and ebooks. Each will have their own view of the public catalog. The 
nonsubscribers' patrons should not see the bib record, while, 
obviously, the subscribers' patrons should.

Our main consortium isn't using Evergreen yet (we have a small 
cluster of "developmental partner" libraries that are giving us the 
chance to get EG-fluent); we're migrating to it by the end of May. So 
there's some time for us to work things like this out.

Mary


At 08:34 AM 9/30/2010, Melissa Belvadi wrote:

>I recommend you seriously consider using the "source" option that Dan listed.
>
>To give you more detail, every bib record has attached to it a field 
>called the "source".
>
>There's a table that lists all of the possible sources (you can add 
>more as needed), and for each one, whether it is "transcendent" or not.
>
>Transcendent simply means that the record will be visible in the 
>OPAC without any items attached and even if you haven't added 
>anything extra to the 856.
>
>So, for instance, for our ebooks, we have a special "source" which 
>is set to transcendent, and when we add ebook records, we change the 
>source from the default to this other source.
>
>I just find this a cleaner option from a cataloguing perspective 
>than adding a subfield to the 856.
>
>Very recently, we (UPEI) had the wonderful Dan Scott add two things 
>to make this much easier - the ability to modify the source in the 
>staff client on a per-record basis, and a fix to the Vandeley (Batch 
>import) so that the "source" pulldown there actually worked.
>
>Dan, is that code out there for Mary to use in her system yet?
>
>FYI, the table in question is config.bib_source for your SQL people, 
>and the bib field that references it is biblio.record_entry.source.
>
>Melissa Belvadi
>
>
>
>
>---
>Melissa Belvadi
>Emerging Technologies & Metadata Librarian
>University of Prince Edward Island
>mbelvadi at upei.ca
>902-566-0581
>
>
>
> >>> On 9/29/2010 at 11:02 AM, in message <4CA34A0A.D6C : 92 : 
> 60780>, Mary Llewellyn <mllewell at biblio.org> wrote:
>
>Ah, that's disappointing. The display of multiple 856s will be ugly 
>and confusing to the library patrons.
>
>Thanks for the reply.
>
>Mary
>
>
>At 08:58 AM 9/29/2010, you wrote:
>>
>>Quoting Mary Llewellyn <mllewell at biblio.org>:
>>
>>>Jumping in here with a question about adding subfield 9. If we have
>>>more than one library subscribed to an e-resource, can we add
>>>multiple subfields 9 to a single 856 to display the bib in each of
>>>those libraries' public catalogs?
>>
>>
>>You can add multiple 856 tags. IIRC they are repeatable.
>>
>>Also, in checking the code, it looks like you're expected to add
>>multiple 856s, one for each holding library.
>>
>>Also, in 2.0 at least, the shortname can go in a subfield 9, w, or n.
>>
>>HtH,
>>Jason Stephenson
>>Merrimack Valley Library Consortium
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Sent from my iPad
>>>
>>>On Sep 28, 2010, at 9:30 PM, Dan Scott <dan at coffeecode.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 05:13:03PM -0500, Deanna  Frazee wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks Dan,
>>>>>
>>>>>It makes sense.  But my problem is that the MARC record is not
>>>>>displaying at all in the public catalog.  I'm assuming this is because
>>>>>there is no holding record, but perhaps I'm wrong?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>There are three ways a record can be made visible in the public
>>>>catalogue:
>>>>  * Set the record source to a transcendent source
>>>>  * Add a copy with a visible status in a visible copy location in a
>>>>    visible library
>>>>  * (As of 1.6) add an 856, first indicator 4, second indicator 0,
>>>>    with a $9 subfield with a value matching a shortname in your
>>>>    search scope
>>>>
>>>>If your record isn't displaying in the public catalog, and you have an
>>>>856 40 $9 SHORTNAME in the record, then perhaps something else is wrong
>>>>with the record or your configuration. At this point, without a concrete
>>>>example, there's not much I can do to help diagnose the problem further.
>>
>Mary Llewellyn
>
>Mary Llewellyn
>Database Manager
>Bibliomation, Inc.
>Middlebury, CT
>
>mllewell at biblio.org

Mary Llewellyn

Mary Llewellyn
Database Manager
Bibliomation, Inc.
Middlebury, CT

mllewell at biblio.org  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://libmail.georgialibraries.org/pipermail/open-ils-general/attachments/20100930/19c14c02/attachment.htm