Maine Shared Collections Strategy Technical Services Meeting
January 26, 2012
1-3, Colby College, Miller Library Conference Room
Attending: Sara Amato (via webcast), Venice Bayrd, Karl Fattig, Sharon Fitzgerald, Valerie Glenn, Clem Guthro, James Jackson-Sanborn, Toni Katz, Judie Leighton, Lanny Lumbert, Mary Macul, Deb Rollins, Mary Saunders, Sharon Saunders.
1. Future directions for Maine – James
James gave an overview of possible directions for URSUS and MaineCat in the next 2-3 years. The URSUS libraries will be participating in a trial of WorldCat Local soon. If they move forward, this could affect decisions made about items to include in the WorldCat Knowledge Base.
2. OCLC Reclamation Project
a. Status
URSUS: All records have been sent; the grant and non-grant participants are in various states of review. Each library made its own decisions on which records to send.
Bangor Public: the only items left in the review file are periodicals (held by multi). Other libraries in URSUS also have some unresolved “multi” records.
Maine State Library: unusually large number of electronic resources (netlibrary. see “Other issues” notes below).
UMaine: problems with government documents (federal and state) and map records. (~8600). They have around 12,000 unresolved records; also around 1,000 records that look fine but aren’t matching due to 001 prefixes. OCLC will be reprocessing these.
USM: around 45 records unresolved (no match in OCLC), but most are HeinOnline records (Law library). Should be sending info to Sara soon.
Bates: All records that were sent have been processed. Records are only allowed to match on the 001 (no title qualifier), and only records with an 001 were sent. There are no unresolved records. Sharon is working on the 3rd scan/delete report. She mentioned that there should be around 8,000 records that have holdings deleted (mostly government documents that have already been withdrawn).
Bowdoin: Sent around 618,000 records. Currently reviewing unresolveds and the initial scan/delete report. They initially chose to have a title qualifier for record matching, but then re-processed their unresolved records without the title qualifier. Their initial scan/delete report includes 12,000 records – this appears to be accurate.
Colby: They did not send all of their records; held back around 66,000 records for certain collections that they are not sure what they’re doing with (ie, VHS, Maine documents). They did select to match on a title qualifier, which has led to some confusion and ~673 added records which still need attention. Currently working on unresolveds; around 24 valid unresolveds (out of ~373).
b. Reports – questions on how to handle?
Questions about the review files, unresolved records, etc., were raised during the status update discussion and were on topics such as the title qualifier, what a merged record is, and electronic resource records (see below).
c. Other issues?
Sara has found some system-wide codes in URSUS that are not mapped to a particular library. Some of these are netLibrary titles, others may be Springer; Sara will send a file of the titles and allow people to decide whether or not their holdings should be attached.
d. Timeline
The goal is to finish the scan/delete process for all participants by the end of January.
3. Reloading of records (update of 001) – Sara
The issue: When corrected records are reloaded into local systems, the 001 field will be updated with a new (correct) 001. Do folks want to move the current 001 into an 019 field? Yes, but only if it is not an onerous process.
Discussion: why would we want to do this (ie, reload the records)?
Some libraries sent records without an 001, and re-loading the records would insert an 001 into the local record. In addition, many older records have been updated or merged in OCLC and have a new 001; the re-loading process would update the local records with the current 001.
The primary issue is with the load table, because the 001 is the current match point. Venice is working on a solution that would replace the 001 and not impact any other fields.
4. WorldCat Knowledge Base
Note: Each library should sign up for this. It is free with OCLC Cataloging subscription.
a. Materials to include:
For now, at minimum, enter owned/purchased material such as e-book collections and collections like ECCO, EEBO, Early American Imprints. If URSUS does decide to move to WorldCat Local, at that time those libraries will need to include all electronic material. MSL and BPL representatives will discuss what to include with their reference staff.
Each library needs a list of its owned electronic resources in order to begin populating the
WKB. The knowledge base uses Pubget to determine a libraries’ electronic resource holdings. In order to do this, a library will need to supply its administrative login/password for vendors.
A question was raised about whether or not Serials Solutions data can be transferred to knowledge base. There were many concerns about transfer of data/workload. Sara and Valerie will look into this.
b. Timeline
In February, we will continue to investigate WKB with a goal of populating it in March (at least one week prior to the next WCA scan). The next WCA scan is scheduled for the last week in March, with that data becoming available in May/June.
5. Website
A page for the subcommittee has been created on the project website: http://www.maineinfonet.net/mscs/about/people/technical-services-subcommittee/. Basic information is contained, but meeting summaries, project documentation, etc., will be added as the project progresses.