Subject: Combined Record for E-journal versions
To: Technical Services Committee
From: Tschera Connell
Date: 16 APR 2003 (rev)
BACKGROUND
Current situation at OSUL:
According to national cataloging standards, we have been creating separate records for each manifestion of an electronic serial that we receive. For example, if we have a current subscription through OhioLINK, and back issues through JSTOR, we have one record to match the OhioLINK version and one record to match the JSTOR version. The URLs for both versions are added to the print.
Soon, we will also have records for full-text titles in the EbscoHOST databases and records for full-text titles in other databases (records supplied by Serials Solutions). The procedures for handling these records will be very different from the cataloging of separately subscribed titles. Monthly, we will receive files for the Ebsco and Serials Solutions record sets. We will update OSCAR with any changes in the databases coverage (updating the holdings for increased time coverage, adding records for newly indexed titles, and deleting records for serials no longer indexed). Because these records will be batch loaded on a regular basis (6-8,000 at a time), they will not be manually edited.
The current situation means that if we have access to Journal for Example Sake (JES) though OhioLINK and JSTOR, and if JES also was indexed in EbscoHOST databases, and other OSUL databases, we would have 4 separate records for this electronic title (one for the OhioLINK version, one for the JSTOR version, one for the EbscoHOST version and one for the Serials Solutions version). We would have 5 records for the title if we also have the print.
Changes in national standards:
In November 2002, CONSER (Cooperative Online Serialsan international program coordinated by the Library of Congress) adopted a new policy to create single records to represent remote access electronic serials which happen to be available from various aggregators or providers. These CONSER aggregator neutral records will be created from information provided on the primary publishers Web sites. The rationale behind this decision is that because the content comes from the publisher and is then distributed by various vendors/aggregators/consortia, the content provided by the various distributors is identical. CONSER created a task force to develop a process for isolating data elements to create sets of records. They are expected to give their completed recommendations for this process to the CONSER Operations meeting in May, 2003.
Meanwhile
In order to reduce the number of multiple records which will need to be collapsed after the guidelines are finalized, CONSER recently announced an interim policy for cataloging online versions of electronic serials. OCLC has announced that member libraries should follow the following policy:
If there is no record for an electronic serial create a record for the electronic serial based on the publisher's web site, if readily available, or otherwise based on the version to which you have access.If there is a record already in WorldCat representing the electronic serial, use that record even though it may only cite an aggregator or provider other than the one to which you have access. If there are multiple records already in WorldCat representing the electronic serial, choose one of the records, preferring a CONSER record when available. After selecting a record, you may add the URL [email from Robert Bremmer, OCLC, to SERIALST, dated 2/13/03]
Recommendations for OSUL:
Interim:
- Adopt a single record for OSU individually subscribed titles;
- Provide a separate record for each of the full-text journals in EbscoHost databases, and another separate record for each of the full-text journals covered by Serials Solutions [Because of the frequency of the batch loads, there is no way, at this point, to reflect our individual subscriptions on these records. For this reason these records will need to remain separate until procedures can be developed to reflect the new standards.]
- Use the 856 field (Electronic location/access), subfield $3 (Materials specified) to indicate to the public the content available from a particular URL (similar to a LibHas statement).
- Make a recommendation to OhioLINK DMSC that OhioLINK use the new CONSER aggregator neutral records for OhioLINK journals
- if DMSC adopts the recommendation, we shift our other separately subscribed journals to the record used by OhioLINK
- if DMSC does not adopt the recommendation, we identify the new CONSER records and shift our separately subscribed journals to the CONSER record;
- work with suppliers of records for full-text in databases to develop a process whereby the content specific to their titles can be merged into the content of the CONSER record already in OSCAR. [This could take time. CONSER is just in the beginning of developing procedures. It will take even longer for vendors to be able to alter their products to meet the new procedures.]
Two records showing the public display of a current individually subscribed title that we receive electronically in 3 versions. These records show the presence of multiple means of access on a single record and the use of the 856$3 to show material accessed.
- mock-up of a single record representing three versions of an individually subscribed title: the first address is to the Cambridge publisher site (access because of print subscription); the second to JSTOR; the third to the OhioLINK EJC. (Currently the 1st and 3rd are on the same record; JSTOR is on a separate record)
- an existing record the print counterpart which looks much the same as what is being proposed for record representing the electronic version
RECORD FOR PRINT VERSION:
