That is very interesting to know that about the III ERM. We use Serials Solutions and with it there is the resource level, as you describe it, and the title level. If I subscribe to entire package of journals, I can put in the price and other information at either the resource level or the title level. I don't think I would qualify the records I put into the Serials Solutions ERM as "order records." It is more like a central area for keeping track of information about what journals you have access to and includes payment information, licensing, contact information, and administrative user ids and passwords. Barbara Pope Andree Rathemacher wrote: > Barbara, > > We use the Innovative ERM, although we're really just getting started with > it. > > But, the reason we use a suppressed bib record to hold the order is that the > ERM records are at the resource level, while order records correspond often > to single titles. > > For example, the resource in the ERM might be "Blackwell-Synergy" which > describes our journals from Blackwell hosted on their Synergy platform. (Of > course, those same journals might also be hosted on EBSCOhost EJS or > Ingenta, in which case there could be a separate resource record in the ERM > for them). But, in our case, we do not have a journal package from > Blackwell; we subscribe to all our e-journals individually. Thus, each > journal has a separate order record. Thus, I *associate *each order with the > Blackwell-Synergy resource record in the ERM, but the orders are actually > attached to suppressed bibs, one for each title. > > In the case of something like Project Muse, or Sage Premier, yes, we could > attach the order to the resource record instead of the bib (except that we > already had bibs for such resources for a long time and everything is in > place.) > > There is also something that I am not sure about, but I seem to remember > hearing at IUG last year that if you have an order record created in the > ERM, but you are in the Serials Module, the order record doesn't show up, or > visa versa. Someone else could speak to this better, or maybe it's been > fixed... > > I'm encouraged that you find the ERM to be a big time saver. I am still > getting used to being in two modules at once (Serials and ERM), which I > really have to be to access all our subscription data. This of course is a > real system hog, so I tend to avoid it. > > andree > > On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 4:36 PM, Barbara Pope <bpope@pittstate.edu> wrote: > > >> I am very curious about this. Do all of you who use the process of >> creating a separate bib record and supress it also use an ERM? We use an >> ERM to keep track of all of our electronic journal orders, payments, >> licensing information, and contact information. I find the ERM to be a >> real life and time saver. >> >> Thank you. >> >> Sincerely, >> >> Barbara Pope, MALS >> Periodicals/Reference Librarian >> Axe Library >> Pittsburg State University >> 1701 S. Broadway >> Pittsburg KS 66762 >> 620-235-4884 >> bpope@pittstate.edu >> >> >> >>> Our library uses the same process you describe, and we do create >>> suppressed >>> brief records specifically to hold the order records. >>> >>> Christina Torbert >>> Head of Serials & Assistant Professor >>> J.D. Williams Library >>> University of Mississippi >>> ctorbert@olemiss.edu >>> 662-915-7059 >>> 662-915-6744 fax >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: SERIALST: Serials in Libraries Discussion Forum >>> [mailto:SERIALST@list.uvm.edu] On Behalf Of Bowen, Mary Ellen (Library) >>> Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2008 12:14 PM >>> To: SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU >>> Subject: [SERIALST] III and Serials solutions >>> >>> Hi All >>> >>> Our library has III Millennium and we also purchase full marc records >>> from Serials Solutions. The marc records are loaded once per month and >>> enable us to have a link from the check in record to the electronic full >>> text. >>> >>> When ordering a journal directly from the publisher, I create a brief >>> bib and attach an order record to that bib. When the marc record is >>> loaded it does not overlay the brief bib, but creates a new full bib >>> record with check in record. The brief bib and order record remain in >>> III and the public sees the serial on order as well as fully cataloged >>> with the link. I am wondering how other libraries handle this. Do you >>> delete the brief bib and move the order record to the full bib or do you >>> just suppress the brief bib and order from public view. >>> >>> We recently had an issue where all the Serials Solutions marc records >>> were deleted from the catalog so we lost a lot of order history and I do >>> not want that to happen a second time. I appreciate any input on this >>> situation, please contact me off list. >>> >>> Thank you for your help with this. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Mary Ellen Bowen, MLS, AHIP >>> >>> Serials Librarian >>> >>> Elihu Burritt Library >>> >>> Central Connecticut State University >>> >>> 1615 Stanley St. >>> >>> New Britain, CT 06050 >>> >>> Phone: 860-832-2074 >>> >>> P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail. >>> >>> >>> >>> > > > >
