[DCRM-L] Alma, Special Collections and moving to a single, shared record

Wed Feb 7 07:02:09 MST 2018

We migrated from Aleph to Alma in 2013 without merging our bib records. We
merged many of our holdings records, but exempted serials and special
collections materials. During the preparation for migration, Ex Libris
strongly encourages merging of bib and holdings records, and may make it
sound like you "have" to do it, but if your institution is able to make the
case why certain categories of materials shouldn't be merged, they won't
make you do it. At least that was our experience in 2013.

On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 9:02 AM, Tedford, Beth <tedforme at wfu.edu> wrote:

> I am a rare books copy cataloger at a university library, and have been
> following this discussion with much interest. We are a Voyager library, but
> within 3 years or so we are more than likely moving to Alma. We have
> concerns as well about merging the records. In Voyager we have separate
> records for all our material because of all the descriptive information in
> our bib records. However, it has been explained to us that we will need to
> merge all our records with the general stacks copies where we overlap
> before moving to Alma. Am I understanding it correctly that there is a way
> to NOT merge records in Alma? This would be our ideal situation if that was
> possible. Any information will be greatly appreciated.
>
> On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 9:01 AM, Christine DeZelar-Tiedman <
> dezel002 at umn.edu> wrote:
>
>> Further clarification of U of MN's situation--while we share records
>> among the U of Mn campuses, we do not use the Network zone for this--our
>> records are in the Institution zone. Only e-resource records are in the
>> Network zone. So it's not analogous to Amy's situation.
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 11:09 AM, Claire Stuckey <c-stuc1 at umn.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Amy,
>>> I wasn't involved directly with our migration to Alma, but I consulted
>>> with our other cataloger here, Sarah Yates, who was; she replied: "We
>>> didn't have to deal with anything like this since we didn't merge records
>>> when we migrated to Alma (thank goodness). Has anyone so far suggested that
>>> she try to arrange for her library's special collections records to load
>>> first instead of seventh? Maybe the order is already set in stone, but
>>> that's the only thing I can think of other than the imperfect options she
>>> already mentions in her question."
>>>
>>> I'll just clarify that before Alma, the law library at U of MN did not
>>> share records with the other campus libraries so it's possible we were in a
>>> unique position to be able to have more control. We do share
>>> records/bibliographic records now, but not for our rare collections.
>>>
>>> Claire
>>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 8:41 AM, Amy Robertson <dawson at american.edu>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Will --
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the suggestion. It's *possible* coding the 040 might
>>>> provide some restrictions but we are still pretty far from understanding
>>>> the various limits that are possible in the admin settings. If it is
>>>> possible it would only protect the records we didn't overlap with --
>>>> unfortunately we have been unable to find out how many will overlap with
>>>> the records that are loaded prior to ours.
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 9:01 AM, Will Evans <evans at bostonathenaeum.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Amy,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there any way to protect your data enhancements by coding the 040
>>>>> with “$e dcrmb” or any its of forerunners?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>>
>>>>> Will
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
>>>>>
>>>>> Will Evans
>>>>>
>>>>> National Endowment for the Humanities
>>>>>
>>>>> Chief Librarian in Charge of Technical Services
>>>>>
>>>>> Library of the Boston Athenaeum
>>>>>
>>>>> 10 1/2 Beacon Street
>>>>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=10+1/2+Beacon+Street+Boston,+MA%C2%A0%C2%A0+02108&entry=gmail&source=g>
>>>>>
>>>>> Boston, MA   02108
>>>>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=10+1/2+Beacon+Street+Boston,+MA%C2%A0%C2%A0+02108&entry=gmail&source=g>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Tel:  617-227-0270 ext. 243 <(617)%20227-0270>
>>>>>
>>>>> Fax: 617-227-5266 <(617)%20227-5266>
>>>>>
>>>>> www.bostonathenaeum.org
>>>>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.bostonathenaeum.org_&d=DwMFaQ&c=U0G0XJAMhEk_X0GAGzCL7Q&r=Ccmr2OuUJ8eW2hnxd74xaNcyu_MTx_PDxUlbVFcpDOQ&m=GyepDiGFsDUJRZ0mOcDfl9vVHcIaaKHxdrOrt4aW7JE&s=EH9ZA-FAcPV2oKJSPzp3TwLRE2lOQYTAkYxbtqmCGK8&e=>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *From:* DCRM-L [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] *On Behalf Of *Amy
>>>>> Robertson
>>>>> *Sent:* Friday, February 02, 2018 8:07 AM
>>>>> *To:* DCRM Users' Group
>>>>> *Subject:* [DCRM-L] Alma, Special Collections and moving to a single,
>>>>> shared record
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hello all --
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not sure if this question is appropriate here but I'm hoping those
>>>>> with more experience than me will have some thoughts on this problem.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> We are part of a consortium about to migrate to Alma and to a single
>>>>> record. The single record, called the master record, is determined by the
>>>>> record load. Each institution's records are loaded one by one into the
>>>>> shared catalog called the Network Zone. The master record is the first
>>>>> unique OCLC record loaded -- subsequent copies are linked to the master
>>>>> record. No fields from the subsequent copies are retained unless they are
>>>>> tagged $9 LOCAL Our institution's records will be loaded 7th -- so we will
>>>>> have many instances where just our holdings will be linked and our original
>>>>> bib will not be loaded.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> We are concerned that we will lose enhancements, especially in our
>>>>> special collections records, and especially those for rare books from the
>>>>> hand press era, (as well as any records we add post migration).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> As an example, we might have a record in our current ILS that is a
>>>>> match to an OCLC record but has been enhanced by our cataloger with both
>>>>> local notes unique to our copy as well enhancements that apply to the work
>>>>> as a whole.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> As I mentioned above, truly local notes are protected with $9 LOCAL
>>>>> but the other enhancements would not be.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> If a record is migrated into the Network Zone, other institutions who
>>>>> have the same title can change any field that doesn't have the $9 LOCAL or
>>>>> they may choose to overlay the record. In such a case, enhancements that
>>>>> aren't local notes would be lost such as:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *245 -- original OCLC title was abridged -- cataloger extended the
>>>>> transcription*
>>>>>
>>>>> *264 -- cataloger extended transcription to include publisher's
>>>>> address from the title page*
>>>>>
>>>>> *546 -- language note added*
>>>>>
>>>>> *505 -- cataloger added contents from the title page *
>>>>>
>>>>> *Signature statement added*
>>>>>
>>>>> *Genre headings added*
>>>>>
>>>>> *Additional subject headings added*
>>>>>
>>>>> *Access point for publisher added*
>>>>>
>>>>> *752 -- hierarchical place name added*
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> We have confirmed through Ex Libris that there is no way to protect
>>>>> these fields in the Network Zone. An option that has been suggested is to
>>>>> move the 035 OCLC data into another field thereby preventing the records we
>>>>> are concerned about from being loaded into the Network Zone. If this
>>>>> happens, the records can only be viewed by searching our institution's
>>>>> instance of Alma -- a consortium search would not return these records.
>>>>> This isn't ideal since we would like to have maximum exposure for these
>>>>> unique materials.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It seems to boil down to either we:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --load the records into the Network Zone but lose any enhancements
>>>>> we've made to records that don't fall under $LOCAL
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> OR
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -- load the records only into the Institution Zone and lose Network
>>>>> Zone exposure for the materials
>>>>>
>>>>> There has also been the suggestion to reload our records into OCLC
>>>>> since having OCLC numbers that don't overlap with other records in our
>>>>> consortium would ensure that our special collections records would be
>>>>> "master" records in the shared Network Zone. But this seems like bad OCLC
>>>>> practice.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Has anyone encountered this situation or have any thoughts on it?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks in advance for any advice!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>> Amy Robertson
>>>>>
>>>>> Coordinator of Original Cataloging
>>>>>
>>>>> American University
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Amy
>>>> Cataloging Services Unit
>>>> 202-885-3568 <(202)%20885-3568>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Claire M. Stuckey, M.A., LPCC, NBC-HWC
>>> Library Program Specialist I, U of MN Law Library
>>> 229 19th Ave. S., #120, Minneapolis, MN 55455
>>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=229+19th+Ave.+S.,+%23120,+Minneapolis,+MN+55455+612&entry=gmail&source=g>
>>> 612-624-7536 <(612)%20624-7536> law.umn.edu/library
>>>
>>> Graduate Faculty & Advisor, U of MN Earl E. Bakken Center for
>>> Spirituality & Healing
>>> 420 Delaware St. SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455
>>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=420+Delaware+St.+SE,+Minneapolis,+MN+55455&entry=gmail&source=g>
>>> Office hrs: By appt. c-stuc1 at umn.edu 612-490-6761 <(612)%20490-6761>
>>> csh.umn.edu
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Christine DeZelar-Tiedman
>> Metadata and Emerging Technologies Librarian
>> University of Minnesota Libraries
>> 160 Wilson Library
>> 309 19th Ave. S.
>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=309+19th+Ave.+S.+%C2%A0+%C2%A0+%C2%A0+%C2%A0+%C2%A0+%C2%A0+%C2%A0+%C2%A0+%C2%A0+%C2%A0+%C2%A0+%C2%A0+Minneapolis,+MN+55455(612&entry=gmail&source=g>
>> Minneapolis, MN 55455
>> (612) 625-0381
>> dezel002 at umn.edu
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Beth Tedford, MLIS
> Special Collections & Archives Assistant
> Rare books cataloger
> Z. Smith Reynolds Library
> Wake Forest University
> PO Box 7777
> Winston-Salem, NC 27109
> 336-758-4657 <(336)%20758-4657>
> tedforme at wfu.edu
> Defender of Wonders
>
>

-- 
Christine DeZelar-Tiedman
Metadata and Emerging Technologies Librarian
University of Minnesota Libraries
160 Wilson Library
309 19th Ave. S.
Minneapolis, MN 55455
(612) 625-0381
dezel002 at umn.edu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20180207/200fbc33/attachment-0001.html>