Les, Steve, or anyone who might know -- Is there any progress on this or a meeting relative to it at ALA in N.O.? As Laura McElfresh responded on 4/12/06, Emory is interested in seeing a move in this direction too. Thanks, Lauren -- Lauren Corbett Head of Acquisitions Emory University -- Woodruff Library ph: 404 712 1818 fax: 404 727 0408 Les Hawkins wrote: > In August 2005 the following proposal was sent to several lists for > comment. If I recall, we did not receive many replies. If there is > interest in this idea, I can ask the PCC leadership to consider setting up > a group to look into endorsing/pursuing this. > > Proposal for a Provider-Neutral Record for Online Integrating Resources > > As a follow-up to a discussion at the CONSER Operations meeting in May, I > invite a wider discussion on a provider neutral approach to cataloging > integrating resources. The CONSER meeting discussion summary is available > from: http://www.loc.gov/acq/conser/conop2005.html#13 > > This would be similar to the aggregator neutral cataloging policy for > E-Serials. Peter Fletcher presented this topic at the Operations > meeting and drafted the proposal below. Please read through the proposal > below and respond to the list or contact Peter directly with your > comments. Please excuse the cross-postings. > > Specific proposal: establish a provider-neutral record policy, similar to > the CONSER aggregator-neutral policy, for online integrating resources, > with the description based, if possible, on an original source of content > such as the original publisher, or academic society or association. As > with the CONSER policy, the record would contain information applicable to > all provider versions, but information on the provider would only appear > in citing which version the description was based on. > > Discussion: some online integrating resources, normally indexes/databases, > have a single source, but they often have several service providers. > > Some examples: > > Medline (source: National Library of Medicine; also available via OCLC, > EBSCO, OVID, Cambridge Scientific Abstracts, etc.) > > PAIS international (source Cambridge scientific abstracts; also available > also via OCLC, OVID/Silverplatter, etc.?) > > Art index/fulltext/abstracts (source Wilson; also available via OCLC > FirstSearch, others?) > > Sociological abstracts (source CSA; also available via OVID/Silverplatter, > OCLC FirsSearch, etc.?) > > CINAHL (source: CINAHL Information Systems; also available via OCLC > FirstSearch, OVID/Silverplatter) > > Education index/full-text/abstracts (source Wilson; also available via > OCLC FirstSearch) > > ERIC is also a government source, but is available via many > interfaces/providers such as EBSCO, OCLC FirstSearch, etc. > > Presently, in the utilities, there are many records representing these > kinds of titles, generally with each based on a different provider, even > though the essential content is the same. Are we and library patrons well > served by providing these separate records? If we had one record > representing these titles, it would save cataloging time when our > libraries change provider packages or acquire new ones and thus better > serve the patron with faster maintenance and acquisition of these > records. Also, if a library has more than one version of such a title, > having one OPAC record with multiple URLs might serve patrons better than > multiple records that contain subtle descriptive differences. > > Some specific differences between provider versions could be noted as > such: "Some providers have ". Also, ISSN policy works in favor of a > provider-neutral approach, since only one ISSN will be assigned to only > one record that represents a particular electronic integrating resource > title. And, as with CONSER, for record consolidation, the 936 could be > used to indicate which records will be deleted. > > Peter will be compiling responses to the proposal, please contact him > directly if you intend to reply off list. I will be out of the office > Aug. 8-19. Thanks! > > Les Hawkins > CONSER Coordinator > 202 707-5185 > > Peter V. Fletcher > Serials & Electronic Resources Catalog Librarian, > Bibliographer for Germanic and Russian Studies > > Howard-Tilton Memorial Library > Tulane University > 7001 Freret Street > New Orleans, LA 70118 > http://www.tulane.edu/~techserv/catdept.html (504) 862-8582 > Fax: (504) 862-8556 > > fletcher at tulane.edu > > On Wed, 22 Feb 2006, Steven C Shadle wrote: > > >> Nancy -- My understanding is that PCC has not endorsed >> aggregator-neutral practice for integrating resources. Because PCC >> policy is OCLC policy, I would assume at this point you would create a >> separate record (sigh). Others who are more in touch with PCC >> decision-making might have a better sense of any decision status. >> --Steve >> >> Steve Shadle/Serials Access Librarian ***** shadle@u.washington.edu >> University of Washington Libraries *** Phone: (206) 685-3983 >> Seattle, WA 98195-2900 * Fax: (206) 685-8743 >> >> On Wed, 22 Feb 2006, Nancy Chaffin wrote: >> >> >>> Hi all >>> >>> I understand how the aggregator neutral record works for serials, but is there >>> a similar rule/practice I am missing for integrating resources, specifically >>> abstracting/indexing databases that are offered on different platforms? >>> >>> Example: >>> Our library subscribes to Music Index Online directly from the publisher, >>> Harmonie Park Press. However, we are moving our subscription to the Ebsco >>> version. There is no catalog record for the resource listing Ebsco as the >>> publisher or with an Ebsco URL. Should I use the record for Harmonie, or >>> create a new one for Ebsco? >>> >>> TIA, >>> >>> Nancy >>> -- >>> Nancy J. Chaffin >>> Metadata Librarian >>> Colorado State University Libraries >>> Fort Collins, CO 80523-1019 >>> >>> voice: 970.491.1847 >>> fax: 970.491.4661 >>> e-mail: Nancy.Chaffin@colostate.edu >>> >>> -- Lauren Corbett Head of Acquisitions Emory University -- Woodruff Library ph: 404 712 1818 fax: 404 727 0408
