Hello all,

I wonder if there is anybody out there who has assessed the quality of data being offered by the coverage load vendors? I'm principally interested in Serials Solutions, Ebsco A-Z, and III's CASE product, but would also welcome comments on any others.

Here is an example from the coverage loads for ACM: "SIGART bulletin" was published 1990-1998 with previous and later titles. There is (to my cataloguing mind) a problem over the coverage that is available from SS, EAZ and CASE: they list the coverage for SIGART bulletin to be 1970-1998, and don't have any listing for the previous title. I've looked in a few catalogues (randomly) and it seems to me that libraries are simply accepting that (wrong) coverage data. How do your patrons find the online version of "SIGART newsletter"?

Has that bothered anybody out there enough to have attempted to get these vendors to properly match the coverage to the title runs? Or, are we so seriously understaffed world-wide that we can't either do the checking & correcting or pressure the vendors to produce accurate information? Has anybody ever offered to clean up the data offered by these vendors to benefit all others?

I'm feeling like this is going to develop into one of those Publisher vs Vendor, IT vs Cataloguer debates, but I'm always mindful of what our library patrons want to see when they look on our OPACs.

Thanks!

Helen Cahill
Cataloguer, Collection Services
Massey University Library
Private Bag 11054
Palmerston North 4442
NEW ZEALAND

Ph: + 64 6 350 5799 ext 7876
Fax: + 64 6 350 5692
emai: H.Cahill@massey.ac.nz<mailto:H.Cahill@massey.ac.nz>
http://library.massey.ac.nz