Since I am a firm believer in the one record model, we retain the same bib. record, adding in the link (which shows prominently at the top of the record in the public catalog) if it is a title that we pay for individually.  However, as Diane said, we only do full cataloging of other e-journal bibs for titles on stable platforms/packages like JSTOR and Project Muse, but don’t bother with titles exclusive to aggregators.  Our A-Z list takes care of those (and, we hope, when we implement Encore that they will appear seamlessly in the searches done by our patrons).   We do attach a new order record so that the vendor and fund codes, etc. are all correct.

I might add that, although I haven’t looked really closely at RDA in relation to serial cataloging, if what I have gleaned so far is correct, the one record model is where we are heading anyway.  Just a thought.

Susan

Susan Andrews
Head, Serials Librarian
Texas A&M University-Commerce
P.O. Box 3011 - Library
Commerce, TX 75429-3011
Susan_Andrews@tamu-commerce.edu
(903)886-5733
"Your Success Is Our Business"

From: SERIALST: Serials in Libraries Discussion Forum [mailto:SERIALST@list.uvm.edu] On Behalf Of Storey, Joe L
Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2011 2:32 PM
To: SERIALST@list.uvm.edu
Subject: [SERIALST] Switching print journals to online-only

We are beginning to switch more of our print journal titles to online and need to come up with coherent procedures for making the change.  I would be interested in hearing from others about how they do this.

Do you catalog the new format as a new title, or do you use the existing bibliographic record?  Do you close the order for the print title and create a new order for the online version, or do you adapt the print order record to reflect the new situation?

Thanks for your input.

Joe

Joe L. Storey

Assoc. Director of the Library &

  Head of Collections Support Services

St. Mary's College of Maryland

St. Mary's City, MD 20686

240-895-4260 (voice)   240-895-4492 (fax)