Thanks Guy,

 

Is it necessary then to keep the 863 fields:

 

863         __ |8 1.1 |a 1-32 |i 1959-1990

863         __ |8 1.2 |a 44-46 |i 2002-2004

866         31 |a v.1(1959)-v.32(1990) |8 1.1

866         31 |a v.44(2002)-v.46(2004) |8 1.2

 

If not, can the 866 fields stop at the year and not have the information after the delimiter that reference the 863s?

 

Best,

 

Rachael

 

From: serialst@simplelists.com <serialst@simplelists.com> On Behalf Of Guy Vernon Frost
Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 9:56 AM
To: serialst@simplelists.com
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [SERIALST] Re: Thoughts on multiple 866 Holdings Statements in Alma

 

Rachel,

 

Both are correct. The automated system theoretically would insert that punctuation shown in your first example (adjacent display) for public display "if" it was decided to display as a string. Its opposite is your second example (separate display). Those definitions come from the ANSI/NISO definitions beginning on page 13 of the standard. http://groups.niso.org/apps/group_public/download.php/18121/Z39.71-2006_%28R2011%29.pdf

 

Many choose to use the separate display because it is easier to read. Patrons have no idea what the punctuation marks mean. The separate display is much easier to see what is missing (or not missing).

 

Guy Frost, B.M.E., M.M.E., M.L.S., Ed.S.
Professor of Library Science/Catalog Librarian
Founder: New Age Movements, Occultism and Spiritualism Research Library (NAMOSRL)

NAMOSRL (Vtext): https://vtext.valdosta.edu/xmlui/handle/10428/2169

NAMOSRL (Flickr): https://flic.kr/s/aHsmNT91vB
NACO Georgia Funnel Coordinator
Odum Library/Valdosta State University
Valdosta, Georgia 31698-0150
229.259.5060
gfrost@valdosta.edu
FDLP 0125

From: serialst@simplelists.com <serialst@simplelists.com> on behalf of Rachael Davis <davirach@ohsu.edu>
Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 12:23 PM
To: serialst@simplelists.com <serialst@simplelists.com>
Subject: [SERIALST] Thoughts on multiple 866 Holdings Statements in Alma

 

Delivered From External Sender

Hi out there Alma Serials Warriors,

 

I have a question that’s been gnawing at me since I moved libraries (both of which use Alma and are in the same Alliance). One library uses a single 866 Holdings statement and just uses punctuation (comma, semicolon) to indicate gaps and non-gap breaks in holdings per ANSI/NISO Z39.71-2006 (R2011) like this:

 

866         31 |a v.22(1991)-v.23(1992),v.49(2000)-v.51(2004)

 

and the other uses multiple Holdings statements like this:

 

866         31 |a v.22(1991)-v.23(1992) |8 1.1

866         31 |a v.49(2000)-v.51(2004) |8 1.2

 

Which one is correct per Alma or does it matter? I’ve done a little research and it seems you might be able to use both in Alma but I wanted to check with what others have been doing.

 

Kind Regards,

 

Rachael

To unsubscribe from this list please go to http://archives.simplelists.com

To unsubscribe from this list please go to http://www.simplelists.com/confirm.php?u=vHtd7C8zNoNnfcKBUU7MhWGnebzw6VKU