[Eril-l] notes in ebook records
Pennington, Buddy D.
penningtonb at umkc.edu
Fri Mar 24 07:22:15 PDT 2017
We have an electronic resources team who adds the note into Serials Solutions whenever we activate a collection or title in that knowledge base. If we are not using Serials Solutions for the MARC record our cataloging department adds the note.
We were also very concerned about volume but with Serials Solutions, if you add a note at the collection level it is passed down to all the titles in the collection and is also passed through to the MARC record. The vast majority of our ebook titles are in collections or packages so this method is sustainable for us.
Buddy Pennington
Director of Collections and Access Management
University of Missouri--Kansas City
308 Miller Nichols Library
800 East 51st St.
Kansas City, MO 64110-2499
penningtonb at umkc.edu<mailto:penningtonb at umkc.edu>
816-235-1548
UMKC Libraries<http://library.umkc.edu/>
From: Tina Herman Buck [mailto:tinabuck at gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2017 8:48 AM
To: Pennington, Buddy D. <penningtonb at umkc.edu>
Cc: Amy Lynn Fry <afry at bgsu.edu>; Eril-l at lists.eril-l.org
Subject: Re: [Eril-l] notes in ebook records
I have a question for those who add notes (anywhere) regarding simultaneous users: who adds the note? I.e., which department, at what stage of the process, and how do they get that information?
We would like to provide this info to our users but the amount of upkeep for the huge quantity of ebook records involved is very concerning.
Thanks.
Sincerely,
Tina
Tina Herman Buck
Electronic Resources Librarian
University of Central Florida Libraries
P.O. Box 162666
Orlando, FL 32816-2666
Phone: 407-823-0448
Fax: 407-823-6289
Tina.Buck at ucf.edu<mailto:Tina.Buck at ucf.edu>
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 1:43 PM, Pennington, Buddy D. <penningtonb at umkc.edu<mailto:penningtonb at umkc.edu>> wrote:
We add this to the 856. We get most of our records through Serials Solutions so we add the information there and it gets passed through to the MARC records. We elected to note only limited access so no note = unlimited users.
856 44 |zUMKC Online Access via Safari Technical Books|uhttp://proxy.library.umkc.edu/login?url=http://proquest.safaribooksonline.com/0596100094|3Limited<http://proxy.library.umkc.edu/login?url=http://proquest.safaribooksonline.com/0596100094%7C3Limited> to four simultaneous users.
The advantage of this is that the note displays in our OPAC as part of the URL the user clicks (http://laurel.lso.missouri.edu/record=b8118466~S3)
Buddy Pennington
Director of Collections and Access Management
University of Missouri--Kansas City
308 Miller Nichols Library
800 East 51st St.
Kansas City, MO 64110-2499
penningtonb at umkc.edu<mailto:penningtonb at umkc.edu>
816-235-1548<tel:(816)%20235-1548>
UMKC Libraries<http://library.umkc.edu/>
From: Eril-l [mailto:eril-l-bounces at lists.eril-l.org<mailto:eril-l-bounces at lists.eril-l.org>] On Behalf Of Spurgin, Kristina M.
Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2017 12:34 PM
To: Amy Lynn Fry <afry at bgsu.edu<mailto:afry at bgsu.edu>>; Eril-l at lists.eril-l.org<mailto:Eril-l at lists.eril-l.org>
Subject: Re: [Eril-l] notes in ebook records
We put it in the 506:
=506 1\$aAccess limited to UNC Chapel Hill-authenticated users.$fUnlimited simultaneous users
=506 1\$aAccess limited to UNC Chapel Hill-authenticated users.$fLimited to three (3) concurrent users
=506 1\$aAccess limited to UNC Chapel Hill-authenticated users.$fLimited to one (1) concurrent user
This applies not just to ebooks, but also streaming media titles and anything else that happens to get cataloged through my section. In general these are NOT added to MARC records for e-journal titles.
Currently this does not display *prominently* in our online catalog view. A user needs to click on the “Full record” tab and look in the Notes section for the one labeled “Access restrictions:”
However, library staff---particularly front line public service staff and reserves staff---know to look there. That solves our primary problems:
- users reporting that an ebook isn’t working and public service staff not knowing where to look to find out if it’s likely just a limited-concurrent user problem
- limited-concurrent user books being placed on reserve – now reserve staff can warn professors and/or request an unlimited user model at the time reserves are being set up
Technically, I suppose we should be putting $2local on the end, but we aren’t. Not sure why we didn’t. The values in $f are a locally controlled vocabulary, however.
We decided upon this field/usage when it looked like we’d be adding features to our public catalog to:
- more prominently display any MARC (or other data) mapped into that “Access restrictions” property
- add an “Access level” facet so people could exclude single user ebooks, or include only unlimited user ebooks.
Shortly after we started this work, development on that catalog was frozen. We’re now building a new public catalog product, and expect it to include these features.
It was never our end users clamoring for this particular info, so we are living with the situation as-is for now.
Adding the fields to everything has been a gargantuan task, involving:
- Coordinating with acquisitions staff on a shared language for and place for this information where cataloging staff can easily find it for our collections.
- Mapping YBP’s “purchase model” terms to our little local vocab for 506$f, locally and in YBP Technical Specifications for DDA Discovery & Purchase MARC records, and the “E-Shelf Ready” MARC we receive from YBP for a subject-specific e-preferred approval plan
- Ongoing cataloging workflows (documentation, MarcEdit tasks, etc) for preparing batch vendor record sets all had to be updated
- Countless hours of running global updates in the ILS to add the field to collections retrospectively
- Manual project(s) to retrospectively update individually-copy cataloged firm ordered ebooks. (Going forward, ACQ staff updates a spreadsheet with new title purchases, including what platform the title’s on and the “purchase model”. The spreadsheet auto-generates the 506 (and other platform/collection-specific fields) that need to be copied into each record by staff who do that copy cataloging, based on mappings and lookups.
- Dealing with the terrible collections where the number of concurrent users varies per title: working with vendors/service providers to get per-title, specifics on concurrent users, in a form we could use to match/merge into our existing MARC records.
We also use SerialsSolutions for MARC for some ebook collections (though they’re our MARC source of last resort due to quality issues and responsiveness to problem reports). We have 3 accounting units sharing 1 SerialsSolutions account. Each accounting unit has different coding practices for ebooks (relating to stats, local record management needs, etc), so each accounting unit needed to tweak/load their own SerialsSolutions ebook records. Since of course SerialsSolutions can’t split our ebook MARC out into separate files per accounting unit, my answer was to write a script/app that would split up the records in separate files for the 3 units. It’s based on a spreadsheet that maps each tracked SerialsSolutions package to an accounting unit. This was already being used when we started adding the 506s, so I added a column to the spreadsheet to assign the correct 506$f to each package. The script adds the 506 field to the records while it’s splitting them up for delivery to the accounting units.
I guess overall, we’re a little weird in that, for a long time we had some statistical reporting requirements that affected the way we define and manage “collections.” This extends to our desire to have a proactive system in place for reconciling/auditing access and discoverability (and verifying a title list of record to keep on file) for purchases of ebook frontlists, modules, collections, etc.
In general, whenever possible, for me a new “collection” needs to be set up/handled for anything where any of the following varies:
- fiscal year content was purchased
- accounting unit (I only handle cataloging for one, but my unit handles the cataloging or related work for some things that span units)
- platform/provider
- purchased vs. subscribed vs. free/open vs. gratis access
- MARC/metadata source/stream (copy cataloged vs. SerialsSolutions vs. OCLC WorldShare Collection Manager vs. vendor-provided batches vs. YBP “e-shelf ready” vs. … )
- format of content (affects some workflow steps (fixed field batch editing!) and how we’re supposed to record stats)
This is often a bear, and not always possible, but, in addition to generally making sense for our environment and allowing me to keep track (mostly) of and report on everything, it means we have relatively few “collections” where the # of users varies within the collection. For example, it seems like a lot of libraries would consider all their books on Ebrary platform to be the “Ebrary ebook collection.” Meanwhile we distinguish between:
ebrary academic complete (subscription, vendor MARC, unlimited users, 506 batch added)
ebrary public library complete (subscription, vendor MARC, unlimited users, 506 batch added)
ebrary title-by-title perpetual access, HSL (purchased (fo), copy cataloged, users vary, 506 added manually)
ebrary title-by-title perpetual access, UNL (purchased (fo), vendor MARC, users vary, 506 mapped in from spreadsheet before load)
ebrary title-by-title perpetual access, YBP e-preferred (purchased (ap), YBP MARC, users vary, 506 mapped in based on vendor specs)
best,
-=-
Kristina M. Spurgin – Library Data Strategist
E-Resources & Serials Management, Davis Library
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
CB#3938, Davis Library – Chapel Hill, NC 27514-8890
919-962-3825<tel:(919)%20962-3825> – kspurgin at email.unc.edu<mailto:kspurgin at email.unc.edu>
From: Eril-l [mailto:eril-l-bounces at lists.eril-l.org] On Behalf Of Amy Lynn Fry
Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2017 10:02 AM
To: Eril-l at lists.eril-l.org<mailto:Eril-l at lists.eril-l.org>; Web Technologies in Libraries <WEB4LIB at LISTSERV.UC.EDU<mailto:WEB4LIB at LISTSERV.UC.EDU>>
Subject: [Eril-l] notes in ebook records
We have gotten to the point where we really need to include notes in each of our ebook bib records about numbers of simultaneous users.
Have others of you found a need to do this retrospectively? How have you approached this?
I’m specifically interested in:
1. Where in the record did you put the note? In the link? In a 5xx?
2. What does the note say?
3. Does a note also appear within your openURL resolver, and what does that look like?
4. How did you handle books from the same vendor that have different user restrictions? For example, we have ebrary books that have 1, 3 or unlimited users. Do you put the same note in every book from that vendor (that says something like, “Connect to ebook for use restrictions,” or something generic like that), or do you divide up the books into different groups so you can give more precise notes? If you divide them up, how do you manage them in your knowledgebase? Do you keep custom lists?
We have Serials Solutions for our knowledgebase and get some MARC records from them for ebooks. We have Summon and 360 Link for discovery and openURL linking, and Innovative Sierra for our ILS.
Thanks for your help! If you can link me to examples that would be very helpful, too.
Amy
Amy Fry
Associate Professor, E-resources Librarian
Jerome Library
Bowling Green, OH 43403
afry at bgsu.edu<mailto:afry at bgsu.edu>
email is the best way to reach me
_______________________________________________
Eril-l mailing list
Eril-l at lists.eril-l.org<mailto:Eril-l at lists.eril-l.org>
http://lists.eril-l.org/listinfo.cgi/eril-l-eril-l.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.eril-l.org/pipermail/eril-l-eril-l.org/attachments/20170324/bd1b444b/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Eril-l
mailing list