2024-02-23 Acq Small Group for Serials Data alignment Meeting notes

 Date

Feb 23, 2024

 Participants

Aaron Neslin

Gail Murray

Laura Daniels

Alexander Prufling

Heather McMillan

Lauren Seney

Becca Banach

Jackie Magagnosc

Linh Chang

Beverly Geckle

Joanna Cerro

Magda Zacharska

Camelia Naranch

Joe Reimers

Molly Driscoll

Catherine C Tuohy

Julie Stauffer

Owen Stephens

Cindy Tian

Kimberly Pamplin

Peter Sbrzesny

Dennis Bridges

Kimberly Smith

Reinhard Niederer

Dung-Lan Chen

Kimberly Wiljanen

Stephanie Kaceli

 Goals

  •  

 Discussion topics

Time

Item

Presenter

Notes

Time

Item

Presenter

Notes

:04

 

Dennis

  • In last meeting discussed 3 variations. Focused on Inventory and the purpose of this information in Inventory.

  • Today would like to focus on the purpose of this information in Discovery.

    • Assume being able to discover the individual piece

    • Julie: That is used to describe what we have to our users when we do not create an item record for the piece.

    • Laura Daniels 8:08 AM
      I don't expect users to search for a specific serial issue, rather to search for the serial and then see what is available.... but I'm also not working directly with users

    • Owen: Why do you avoid creating item records for those peices?

      • When something is issued in multiple

    • Jackie Magagnosc 8:10 AM
      I've used this information in other institution's catalogs to figure out whether something we haven't received exists for anyone else.

    • Stephanie Kaceli, Cairn University 8:11 AM
      I do the same thing, Jacki

    • Heather McMillan 8:12 AM
      or retain current issues only, will never get an item record.

    • Joe Reimers (EBSCO) 8:13 AM
      Pocket parts and loose-leaf shouldn't get items

    • Jackie Magagnosc 8:14 AM
      At Cornell Law we don't want to spend time making an item for a piece that isn't retained, say an annual index that supersedes, that lives in a non-circulating location, but we would want our users to know that we have the 2023 index, not the 2022.

    • Laura Daniels 8:14 AM
      we don't want to have to create items we know we're just going to delete

    • Lauren: Want to note that a certain aspect of the whole work has been updated within a time scale. It’s not in addition, it’s a replacement.

    • Joe: Claiming has a tight window, so being able to see if someone else received it and claim it in time is important.

    • Owen Stephens 8:18 AM
      I think what I’m trying to do is separate the use cases from the way or mechanic by which we achieve the outcome to meet the use case and I see “not creating an item” as more the mechanic, and what I want to understand is the use cases that drive that mechanic. So if I challenge these things I’m not suggesting something is right or wrong, just attempting to understand the underlying use cases

    • Dennis: So we don’t expect users to search for specific pieces, but to look for the title and see what’s there.

    • Stephanie Kaceli, Cairn University 8:19 AM
      We never barcode our serials but update our holdings statement--in sierra we had the 85x/86x. We update our holdings once bound and rely on the receiving info for the non-bound issues. We want our patrons to be able to see what we have by title--bound and recently received.

    • Stephanie Kaceli, Cairn University 8:20 AM
      I should have avoided the word never but say "rarely"

    • Joe Reimers (EBSCO) 8:20 AM
      That largely mirrors what I saw when I was at ND Law.

    • Dennis: Do users generally know exactly what volume/issue they want?

      • Joe: A very common use case was that the editorial staff would be checking if the library had a copy, then look to see if the library had it. Then verify the citation.

      • Laura: Sometimes they know exactly which article they want, so go to the discovery layer to see if the library has it.

      • Beverly Geckle 8:22 AM
        Even in non-law environment a user may have a citation and need to verify if the library has it.

      • Jackie Magagnosc 8:24 AM
        Remembering the dark ages when you found your article citations in a literature index or database, then figured out where the piece lived on the shelf.

      • Laura Daniels 8:24 AM
        I suspect most users prefer electronic versions of articles, if they are available.

        • Laura Daniels 8:25 AM
          of course, they are not always available, and not always available to all users

      • Julie Stauffer 8:25 AM
        At Owen: I think, at least for Chicago, a item is treated as a permanent, discrete, part of the collection, while holdings with no items may or may not be. There are many internal processes, as well as statistical reports, that rely on these states. This does not mean that we cannot think of other ways to handle this, but it is intertwined with many other processes.

      • Joe Reimers (EBSCO) 8:25 AM
        I wonder if there are still document delivery implications as well... e-content is often barred from ILL, but scans of print copies of articles is permissible

      • Stephanie Kaceli, Cairn University 8:28 AM
        For our licenses (non-law) our e-content is not restricted from ILL (I do not sign contracts if that is a restriction as we do not have the staff to scan when e is available)

      • Laura Daniels to Everyone 8:24 AM
        I suspect most users prefer electronic versions of articles, if they are available.

      • Laura Daniels 8:25 AM
        of course, they are not always available, and not always available to all users

      • Lauren Seney 8:28 AM
        In law library land there's also been a slow adoption of e-versions being full replacements for print. I think we're much closer to that being universal, but I can remember hard discussions with journal editors/staff over the last few years about why the library doesn't have the print when it's available as a PDF electronically.

      • Owen Stephens 8:29 AM
        I think there are some other areas areas where the print version may have unique aspects like foldouts - but it’s obv a small minority of content!

      • Aaron Neslin 8:29 AM
        5C creates items

      • Owen Stephens 8:31 AM
        I know that last time I reviewed license terms it was not uncommon in the UK to have different rules for using electronic versions for ILL supply depending on the location of the library you were supplying to

      • Dennis: Does the discovery layer offer filters?

        • Julie Stauffer 8:37 AM
          No - we can filter by location and other factors. It is primarily using data in the Instance and Holdings rather than Item

        • Dung-Lan Chen 8:42 AM
          In our previous ILS, we had holding statement to show what have in consolidated manner and show gaps if applicable.

    • This is the last meeting we have scheduled for this group. Think it would be helpful to have a group work on defining the workflows for material management. How you create receiving the material, capturing it in your ILS, receiving it, managing it in inventory, what is described in cataloging, how patrons interact with it.

    • Owen: It’s not clear to me what Discovery systems are capable of. We know we can display a holdings. We know we can display an item record.

    • Dung-Lan Chen 8:48 AM
      Yes to continue to meet. Being able to sort is very important whether we enter the data in one field or break them into different fields.

    • Dennis: Might be helpful to have someone organizing this committee, to help coordinate with the other big group stake holders.

    • Owen Stephens 8:51 AM
      Btw if anyone wants to see how the population of the Display summary based on prediction patterns from the Serials module I did a demonstration at Product Council yesterday. And also a longer session for the Implementers group last week.

    • Joe Reimers (EBSCO) 8:52 AM
      We have a Slack channel
      #data-alignment-serials-receiving-inventory-discovery









 Action items

 Decisions