[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] A question of ownership

[Kathy Lussier]

Hi Don,

I don't believe you should have any trouble if your providers are owned 
by ATS. We have some multi-branch library systems using acquisitions, 
and  their providers are owned by the system as well. When they import 
their records, they include in the branch's shortname in the owning 
library subfield. For example, if your owning_lib subfield is b, you 
could add ATS-BLF or ATS-DCL to your 970 b subfield to identify which 
branch owns the copy. In our case, the owning and circulation library is 
always the branch, so it doesn't cause any problems for us. I'm guessing 
development would be required to be able to distinguish between owning 
and circulation library with acquisitions order records.

However, we have come across a couple of problems with identifying the 
system as the context org unit when uploading order records.

* If the fund identified in your 970 field is owned by the branch, the 
upload will fail. We resolved this by only creating funds that are owned 
by the system-level org unit. In cases where we needed to track fund 
accounting for individual branches, we created separate funds for those 
branches that were owned by the system, and used fund tags to help with 
reporting for those branches. I don't think I ever filed a bug on this 
issue, but I can check and add one if it isn't there.

* If the copy location identified in your 970 field is owned by the 
branch, it also will fail. There is a development branch to fix this at 
https://bugs.launchpad.net/evergreen/+bug/1058306 that has not yet been 
merged into Evergreen. Unfortunately, I had issues unrelated to the code 
when I tried testing this branch, so I wasn't able to sign off on it.

Regarding your question on 949 tags, I don't see any reason why you 
wouldn't be able to use them. You would just need to identify the 949 
tag in the provider record and add the appropriate subfield information 
in the holding subfield area of the provider record.

I hope this helps!

Kathy

Kathy Lussier
Project Coordinator
Massachusetts Library Network Cooperative
(508) 343-0128
klussier at masslnc.org
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier

On 11/27/2012 4:30 PM, Donald Butterworth wrote:
> Colleagues,
>
> We are making progress. We have successfully imported a bib record, 
> with item data attached, using the 949 tag, and using the path 
> Cataloging --> MARC Batch Import/Export. We have also successfully 
> imported a bib record with item and order data attached using the 970 
> tag, and generated a purchase order using the path Acquisitions --> 
> Load MARC Order Records. But we still have several questions.
>
> Our library has two campuses with one central processing Tech Services 
> Dept. We frequently purchase two copies of a title; one for the main 
> campus and one for the branch campus. Also our collections float. That 
> is, if our branch campus requests a volume, once they receive it, the 
> branch becomes the circulating library for that volume. Ditto, if the 
> main campus requests a volume from the branch, the main branch becomes 
> the circulating library. This arrangement saves us a bunch of money in 
> shipping costs.
>
> Technically our titles are "owned" by the institution (ATS = SYS1) 
> even though there are separate budgets for each branch.  So when we 
> set up the 970 data elements (Admin --> Server Administration --> 
> Acquisitions --> Providers) we used the Context Org Unit ATS rather 
> than (ATS-BLF = BR1 or ATS-DCL = BR2) to list our Provider records. 
> But, we are starting to think this was a mistake since the Holdings 
> Subfield Tab (--> Providers --> Amazon.com --> Holdings Subfield Tab) 
> only includes a data element for "owning library" and not one for 
> "circulating library".
>
> So, what is the correct setup and workflow to purchase 2 copies of a 
> title, one for each branch, paying for each copy using a different 
> fund, and using the Acquisitions --> Load MARC Order Records path? Are 
> 949 tags ever used with this approach? Is it necessary to list 
> multiple 970 tags to account for the data? How is other item/volume 
> record data supplied to volume/item records since the options are 
> limited in the Holding Subfield?
>
> Thanks again for your insights!
>
> Don
>
> Don Butterworth
> Faculty Associate / Librarian III
> B.L. Fisher Library
> Asbury Theological Seminary
> don.butterworth at asburyseminary.edu 
> <mailto:don.butterworth at asburyseminary.edu>
> (859) 858-2227

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://libmail.georgialibraries.org/pipermail/open-ils-general/attachments/20121128/20e8086a/attachment.htm>