|
Yale University Library
Service Quality
Improvement Council
Bibliographic Access Group Meeting Minutes
Feb. 5, 2002 10-11:30 Rm 409
Present: Nicole Bouche (chair); Steven Arakawa (recording), Susan Crockford-Peters,
Tobin Nellhaus, Rich Richie, Kalee Sprague, Joan Swanekamp
Guest: Richard Crane (11-11:30)
1. Discussion & revision of text of BAG memo to SQIC re Missing/Withdrawn
policy
There was a suggestion for re-phrasing the OPTION 1 scenario to focus
on users who, for various reasons, would be first consulting sources
other than the OPAC. Also a suggestion to revise the language of the
pop-up message; whether "withdrawn" should be the umbrella
term.
If the document is presenting options, a better case needs to be made
for retaining old policies. From the perspective of some in RSC there
is concern that not suppressing the record when the last copy is w/d
would cause confusion for some users (e.g. newcomers) and might be considered
to be too much unnecessary information (by a user who is not particular
about finding a specific edition).
It was noted that not including a record that the library once owned
a copy is also a source of confusion. The discussion called attention
to the need for a statement about the scope of the catalog that might
be on the introductory page of the OPAC, or possibly the pop-up w/d
explanation BAG is drafting & discussing.
Question: Is the record deleted from RLIN & OCLC when the last
copy is w/d, & is this inconsistent with the proposed policy.
Yes, record is deleted; part of work flow.
Another comment: RLIN/OCLC are not considered to be Yale's database
of record, while Orbis is.
Question: What if Yale held the only copy in the utility?
OCLC: bib record is retained even if all holding locations have been
removed. Not clear whether this is the case with RLIN. JS to confirm
this point for our next meeting.
Another comment emphasized that a lot of citations referring to copies
held at Yale will continue to be from print sources, so a public record
of former holdings could be an advantage.
With recon, records for many titles have been & will continue to
appear in Orbis for titles no longer held. Even if we choose to retain
the old policy, records for items no longer held will continue to be
in the OPAC for some time.
It was noted that the memo needs to indicate that the proposed policy
will apply only to w/d cataloged items; it will not apply to items that
have never been cataloged, e.g. desiderata, samples, non-accessioned
gifts, exchange records, certain desk copies. Records for these will
continue to be suppressed but will be viewable on the staff side.
Statement that the pop-up note would be helpful to less informed staff
is illogical given that the question would not even come up if the item
were suppressed from the OPAC. Decision to strike the statement.
Overall, the new proposal would in general mean less staff time spent
checking.
Discussion on whether records for withdrawn items could be set not
to display first in Voyager; conclusion appears to be that given the
variety of search strategies in Voyager, this was unlikely.
Question: Whether there was any real advantage to user feedback based
on the withdrawn pop-up message when reports could take care of it.
One response: If patrons continue to request a withdrawn title based
on the withdrawn pop-up message, revisiting the decision to de-accession
or giving a higher priority for replacement would not be a problem.
Need to re-word under the Pro section "Information about de-selection
decisions will be made public" since it certainly won't.
NLB to incorporate additions and changes to document draft, based on
today's meeting and further input from committee via e-mail, and will
redistribute revised version ASAP, before next week's meeting.
2. Presentation of Kerberized Telnet by Richard Crane from ITS.
Showed how net id would be used as part of the authentication process
for Telnet users.
Those who used Telnet through a client would need to re-configure the
client (e.g. Host explorer) to the Kerberized version & download
an applet.
Question: How would this work through proxy server? RC will test.
RC: Should both Kerberized and unencrypted versions run in tandem for
a transitional period or just cut off the unencrypted version after
a warning period? Consensus: cut off after a warning period.
RC: Instructions for logging on through command line will require some
documentation which could be modified from the MIT documentation. Will
need to consider how long it would take to get this together.
Question: What needs to be done for links? KS will update Database
& Articles page when the new link is available.
Also, announcement needs to be made that links on RSC web pages should
go to the Info page for Database & Articles rather than directly
to the database when such links are present. Kim Parker probably the
best person to contact about who needs to know when the time comes.
RC noted that changing the port in the client would result in a better
error message; group decision was that it would be too disruptive; better
to use same port.
Respectfully submitted,
Steven Arakawa
©
2001 Yale University Library.
Last modified February 13, 2002.
Send comments about this web site to the library web administrator at
Library Administrative Services.
This file is located at http://www.library.yale.edu/Administration/SQIC
|
