Minutes for 12/11/2013

Union Catalog Committee Meeting Agenda and minutes Wednesday, December 11, 2013

Old Business:

• (Alysa, MK, Karen, Mark)—Cataloging standards and RDA topics These topics need more discussion. Completing the revision to the cataloging standards will be delayed until after a decision is made regarding OCLC and the possibility of subscribing to SkyRiver.
• (MK and Mark)—933 tag for maintaining VuFind tags, etc. after deduping De-dupers should continue to copy the bib number of the record that is being removed into the 933 marc tag of the bib that is being kept. If the bib to be deleted has 933 fields with bib numbers, those numbers should also be moved to the bib that is being kept.
• (Nancy and MK)—Deduplicating problems

Reminders:

• OCLC bibs are the “preferred” bibs. Catalogers in OCLC member libraries continue to see their items moved from the OCLC bib to a non-OCLC bib and then the OCLC bib deleted. This shouldn’t happen.
• Please pay attention to format, including large print materials. We still adhere to the expectation that large print materials should be on their own bib and not share a bib with regular print materials.
• Notify Mary Katherine if you notice anything unusual in bib records, particularly Rampart’s. Ex: notes about missing discs contained in the 300 marc field. This segued into a discussion about the most appropriate place to put that information so that patrons will see it.
• It was decided that placing it in the volume field of the item record would;
  • 1) inform the patron;
  • 2) force an item level hold when patrons place a hold online; and,
  • 3) inform circ staff of missing parts. It should not be included in the bib record since they are shared in the database.
• Brief discussion about the use of marc tag 590. Should it be used to inform patrons of things that are unique to a specific library’s item? Probably not, although there are a few bibs in the system which contain information like that. **Note taker’s comment - Contrary to what I said, the format of the 590 (and 690) is not in the Marmot cataloging standards.
• The format that was established several years ago for the 590 field is: The library name spelled out followed by a dash and then the local note. Example: 590 – (those dashes stand for blank indicators)
• Pitkin County Library – Verena Mallory Collection. The format for the 690 local subject heading is similar but includes the appropriate subfield designators. Example: 690 – Routt County History Collection|zBud Werner Memorial Library.
• Subfield z is the geographic location and should contain the library name.
• Format of the 590 and 690 should be included in the revised version of the Marmot cataloging standards.**
• (Jimmy, MK, Mark)—Sierra migration update Sierra known issues page on the Marmot wiki. http://info.marmot.org/tiki-index.php?page=Sierra+Known+Issues
• Jimmy has written a letter to Innovative which included the top 10 issues with Sierra that need to be resolved.
• He shared the spreadsheet of amount of time it takes at each library to get logged in and able to work. It ranges from 30 seconds to 15 minutes. (Aspen Schools has internal network issues that are being worked on.)Libraries whose networks are not supported by Marmot can contact the Marmot help desk for ideas of what changes might be able to be made to fire wall and other settings.
• One problem of window size can be helped by changing the settings to “maximize all windows.” Click on ADMIN, SETTINGS, and choose the WINDOWS tab. Select “maximize windows” click on SAVE SETTINGS and on OK. This will cause the records to open to the full screen size.
• Jamie asked when the ability to scan barcodes into a create list will be added to Sierra.
• He believes it is in an upcoming release.
• Mary Katherine will check on this.
• (Penny)—Redundant order records--order records that trigger duplicate bibs This is still an issue. Mary Katherine verified that the OneClick load table has the 020 as the match point. It was suggested that libraries that use acquisitions should run headings reports after loading order records to get a list of possible duplicates. Mary Katherine will check with III to see if there is a way to get error reports out of data exchange after records are loaded through the OneClick table.

New Business:

• (Amy Shipley)—new minutes taker Marilynn Huff will no longer be taking notes. MK will take them for this meeting.
• Karen Neville said she should be able to do this at future meetings.
• (Jimmy)—OCLC vs. SkyRiver vs. combined OCLC and SkyRiver Below are the primary points from the emails Jimmy has sent to all of us.
• Since there is so much to consider, it would be time well spent to re-read those emails.
  • 1) Cancel Marmot’s OCLC subscription for merged OCLC subscription records. This would save about $6,000/year. ASU and Aspen Schools could export OCLC records from Connexion directly to Sierra (the way other OCLC libraries do); and Marmot staff could load 0 to 5 files (instead of 0 or 1) for Cat Express users. See email #1 item #3. **Members who subscribe to OCLC’s CatExpress product could possibly load their own records.
  • 2) Cancel Marmot’s OCLC subscription for OverDrive records. This would save about $6,000/year if the UCC considers OverDrive metadata adequate. Or it would save about $3,000/year if the UCC accepts SkyRiver records at $0.85 vs $1.50 for OCLC records. To compare OverDrive metadata with OCLC MARC, click on the recently expanded staff view of any OverDrive record. See email #2. **The UCC members are asked to examine and compare the OCLC bibs and the OverDrive metadata bibs before the next meeting. The metadata bibs are free and in the database almost as soon as the titles are ordered. They are sparse on subject headings but Mark feels there is enough there to generate facets.
  • 3) Implement SkyRiver for any Marmot libraries that want this option. Now that CLiC has signed an agreement for SkyRiver with very attractive terms for Colorado, some Marmot libraries may opt in. Others will certainly stay with OCLC. Either way, Marmot’s job is to accommodate a small variety of cost-effective cataloging sources without allowing undesirable dups in the union catalog. See email #1 and email #3.
• A question about how duplicate bibs would be handled if the Marmot database contains both OCLC bibs and SkyRiver bibs. This would need to be explored. Bibs supplied by vendors were also mentioned.
• (Mark)—Record Grouping functionality Mark presented concepts for Grouping Records in VuFind and showed some prototyping work within VuFind. Mark is setting up weekly meetings to demo Grouped Record progress. The first meeting is tentatively scheduled for 12/18.

Due to the length of this meeting, the following items will be deferred until the January meeting.

• (Alysa)—OCLC records for OverDrive items
• (Shannon)—Decision center saves information about withdrawn items?
• (Alysa)—RDA --update bib record templates for creating new bibs
• (Karen) GMD in RDA/Millennium