RS Preliminary LMS Migration
Planning Group Minutes
November 7, 2002
Denise Bennett, Co-chair of the ALEPH Implementation Steering Committee (AISC) Indexing Task Force, explained that there are three levels of indexing: Giant Union Catalog (GUC), State University Libraries (SUL), and individual SULs. GUC represents the combined holdings of the SUL and the Community Colleges and will likely exist as a public catalog only. We expect GUC will not be a separate physical repository of bibliographic records and indexes, rather it will be a virtual assemblage of records created as searches are input and based on indexing in place at the lower levels. Indexing decisions affecting GUC are complete and will be included in the UF test full load scheduled for December.
Denise, Dot, and Jimmie are the members of a UF Indexing Task Force charged with assessing indexing needs specific to UF. In order to solicit input from a wider group, they have shared the UF ALEPH indexing tables and asked for feedback by no later than November 14, when their initial recommendations are due in order to allow time for inclusion in the test full load. Denise offered to post the tables on the UF ALEPH Implementation Web site [this has been done - see http://web.uflib.ufl.edu/lms/ and choose the UF Libraries' Catalog Indexes link. The three letter codes in the index column of the tables make up the ALEPH search command language. Denise pointed out that the public and staff indexes will be the same, although the public interface will not include search choices for all the indexes available.
In response to a question about keyword access to authorities, Denise said that authorities are not included in the current indexing discussions.
We will have keyword access to copy level notes, which are migrating to HOL 852 |x (non-public) and HOL 852 |z (public), and title level notes, which are migrating to BIB 952.
The keyword by MARC tag capability we have in NOTIS will not be available in ALEPH.
In order to make a decision about whether or not to migrate Z'd copies, the group needs to know if we will be able to suppress holdings. If we can suppress holdings, then we want to migrate Z'd copies. If we can't suppress holdings, then we want to explore alternatives that would allow us to transfer the information - perhaps migrating Z'd copies to a fabricated location, which could then be manipulated to serve our purposes. Rich will discuss this with Lydia Motyka at FCLA.
Class code mapping
Nancy distributed class code mapping documents and outlined proposed specifications for conversion. Many of the NOTIS class codes should map easily to HOL 852 Indicator 1 (B, D, L, O, S). We discussed the possibility of having U map to the 852 8, V map to 852 5, and Y map to 852 4. The group agreed that we should convert the 21 records with class code Q, which are primarily HSCL records, to another class code prior to migration.
The group's primary class code concern is the migration of class code X, which is used for electronic resources such as netLibrary records and e-journals. With class code X, call numbers are suppressed from public view. Betsy offered to contact Mary Ann O'Daniel at FCLA with our questions: Does 852 Indicator 1 affect display? Will it be possible to migrate class code X holdings so that the call number is suppressed from public view? If we map class code X to 852 Indicator 1 blank, could we then generate a user message based on that coding? Do other SULs use class code X for netLibrary records? Will 852 first indicators blank and 4-8 be grouped into some type of Other call number index?
Withdrawn status item records
The group consensus is not to migrate withdrawn status item records. The Law Library should be able to access bill/fine information as needed.
Betsy distributed the 9XX conversion table. Gerald pointed out that in the table 909s map to TKR, but 909s containing OCLC numbers should map to 035. [Per comments made by Mary Ann O'Daniel on November 19 at the FCLA Joint Meeting, FCLA plans to migrate the 909 (FU) tags to TKR and the 909 (OCoLC) tags to 035. Currently no one is entering OCLC numbers on provisional records, however there might be instances of 909 OCLC numbers on older provisionals. Also, Betsy found a comprehensive list of 9XX tags used in NOTIS sent by Mary Ann on 10/29/01. After comparing this list against our conversion table, four new tags (907, 908, 947, 948) were found, added to the table, and sent to Rich for sharing with FCLA.]
We still don't have a specific date for Subset Load 3. Rich will contact Lydia on 11/12 to get an update.
Nancy asked how records will be extracted for the test full load. Will all records of a particular type (BIB, HOL, etc.) be loaded before another type is loaded or will all records (BIB, HOL, etc.) associated with a particular resource be loaded followed by the next resource? Underlying this is a concern that a deleted bib might automatically prevent the loading of associated active items. Rich indicated that FCLA is still defining how the extraction will be conducted, and he will contact Lydia with our question.
The next meeting is scheduled for Thursday, December 5, 10:00-11:30am, Library East Conference Room.
- Review indexing tables and give input (All)
- Contact Mary Ann with questions regarding class code X (Betsy)
- Contact Lydia with questions regarding Z'd copies and extraction for full test load (Rich)
- Be prepared for Subset Load 3 (All)