Present at the meeting were: Denise Bennett, Doug Kiker, Lawan Orser, Naomi Young, Priscilla Williams, Rich Bennett, Betsy Simpson and Jimmie Lundgren.

1. URL's in Aleph
Display - Anchor text display in lieu of url display based on 856 subfield y will not be functional in Aleph for the foreseeable future. Rich said that it is a strong public services preference that "link text" as it is referred to in OCLC bib formats or "anchor text" as we usually call it become available. Since we hope that will someday be useful again, the group did not feel that we should delete or discontinue including the anchor text subfield, but that we should be aware that it is not now working and be careful to provide necessary information in another fashion. The 856 subfield u which contains the url displays both in the index and the individual record. When clicked on, this leads first to a separate window with a copyright acceptance statement requiring the user to click a "confirm" button as opposed to a "continue" button. Clicking the "confirm" button leads to the desired site, also in a separate window, whereas clicking on the "continue" button simply closes the copyright window. The catalog search is still on the browser behind it. There is concern that other subfields that have been used for notes or staff information have been displaying as part of the url, but FCLA is working to fix this.
Indexing - URL's are indexed in Aleph (thanks to Denise for her excellent contributions in developing our Aleph search options), both as keyword and browse for both users and staff. In the staff client OPAC we can search for url's by choosing in the browse menu "uri/url/doi(uri)" or we can search find and choose "url (WUR)". In the public OPAC the "Basic search" allows retrieval of url's through find keyword anywhere or browse and choose "URL"; the advance search retrieves url's through "keyword in url" or "keyword anywhere". Limit by format includes the choice "online" and the choice "computer file".

2. The maintenance perspective for broken links is that we need to develop a new strategy. Our very successful linkchecking processes that Lawan has used for several years now are in question due to the scalability of the data as well as the migration to Aleph. We simply have too many links in the catalog now to manage them as we have in the past. Lawan is looking forward to having the full catalog available in Aleph to begin designing and testing options. We will have to wait and see how it will go.

3. Significant additions to Internet resources. Thanks to some collaborative purchases from aggregators, the numbers of e-journals continue to skyrocket. However, Naomi and Doug said that for now we are caught up with work on the Kluwer and Wiley packages. While the Netlibrary e-book record sets have been loaded by FCLA, other sets are being loaded here. Betsy has been loading these and in the case of Books 24x7 is periodically retrieving update files and loading them. Unlike the monographic record sets which can be purchased and loaded, e-journals are handled individually to avoid having duplicate records for book and electronic formats of the same title. While Naomi pointed out that there could be advantages to purchasing electronic serials record sets, but Denise pointed out that retrieval (especially keyword index display which often fails to bring the different version records together), issues for the public still require the use of a single record for each serial title.

4. Rich told us a little about Metalib, the portal software from Ex Libris that FCLA is working to provide. See overview at: http://www.exlibris-usa.com/metalib.htm It will enable searchers to retrieve using fairly rudimentary searches from groups of databases simultaneously. The GUC (combined SUL and community colleges catalog) will exist virtually through Metalib. Also, searchers will be able to retrieve from both the catalog and selected indexes at one time. The version expected out this summer and for possible implementation in the fall will differ considerably from the current version, so Elaine Henjum recommended that we not expend much energy in our customization until it is available. The work has begun for cataloging the electronic databases that have been listed in the Database Locator, and Priscilla Williams has written up a procedure for them incorporating the rules for "Integrating Resources" to the extent that we can presently.

5. PALMM Project post STP plans are based on the fact that the PALMM records are actually in a separate LUIS institution group that will be available until all the other SUL schools have migrated to Aleph. Since our Aleph catalog will not permit us to retrieve from that catalog with our normal catalog searching, FCLA will begin loading the PALMM records into our separate catalog and refreshing them periodically to provide added and corrected records. Michelle Newberry said at the FLA meeting that they would try to do this very soon after STP. Our actual cataloging of the PALMM resources will continue to be done in LUIS during this time. Metalib will offer the possibility of grouping the PALMM database with our catalog and other core databases for our users. It is also possible that we will want to resume putting the 856 fields in records for print versions of items that we own and catalog for PALMM projects to ensure their retrieval by our patrons.

6. Pro's and Con's of using holdings versus bibliographic records for placement of url's in catalog were presented by Naomi. The chief need for including the url in holdings is the accidental overlay of bibliographic records and loss of important access information for electronic serials. Denise and other members of the group spoke in support of replicating the url from the bibliographic record in a holdings field to protect the data from accidental loss in record overlays. The move to implementation of the MARC Holdings format with our migration to Aleph facilitates this choice through provision of a standard field in holdings for placement of the url.

7. Electronic Resources workflows at LC were elucidated in a report recently made available. Betsy said this focused on how LC is working to manage its electronic resources by use of a system they call "Track ER". Priscilla commented that it is interesting to learn in reading it how LC and other libraries are addressing many of the same challenges that we have been working on regarding electronic resources. Doug said that we have not yet implemented any new tracking systems, but are still scanning the license agreements and putting a link to them in the bibliographic record. He said it would be good if a system for electronic resource tracking could be bought off the shelf and used, as opposed to having to develop something in-house at this time.

We ran out of time after that, but otherwise many of these topics could have been discussed at greater length.

Prepared by:  Jimmie Lundgren, April 12, 2004