[DCRM-L] Question about local collection name in Alma

[Matthew Ducmanas]

The option you mention of designating a 9XX field for local collection
names is a fairly straightforward process in Alma. After our migration, my
institution chose to do so in addition to our usual MARC coding for local
collections. Since it would be useful for the special collections
department, we also designated an additional 9XX field to serve as a
broader "collecting area".

After selecting the specific 9XX field you want to use, it just needs to be
turned on in the index configuration and given a label for how it appears
in the search.

An example showing our use of the 973 (local collection name) and 974
(collecting area):
https://librarysearch.temple.edu/catalog/991019849469703811/staff_view

I know there are local portfolio options for e-resources but I'm not
familiar with the built-in collection function you mention.

Cheers,
Matt

-- 
*Matthew Ducmanas*
*Special Collections Cataloging Librarian*


*Cataloging & Metadata ServicesTemple University Libraries215-204-2057*

On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 9:04 AM Christine DeZelar-Tiedman <dezel002 at umn.edu>
wrote:

> Just to be clear, are you talking about collections that are smaller than
> the "location" as defined in Alma? (i.e. 852 $$c)
>
> For these, we use a 710 with $5 MnU. Yes, it does display as
> author/creator, but our curators are less concerned with how it displays,
> and more interested in it being a searchable field. We have created a local
> index in our Primo instance called "Associated name" which includes all 7XX
> fields with $5. It is also available as a name search, but the "associated
> name" index allows for a more targeted search.
>
> I'm not aware of the "Alma built-in function" and would be interested in
> learning more. Our solutions are less than ideal, but it's the best we've
> been able to figure out in our environment.
>
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 1:31 PM Liu, Xiping <xliu54 at central.uh.edu> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>>
>>
>> We recently migrated to Alma and the display of local collection names
>> has become a problem for us (it was a problem back when we were using
>> Sierra, but now it is to the point that we need to figure out  a way to
>> solve the problem or at least improve).
>>
>>
>>
>> So we coded all of our local collection names in 710 field and it is now
>> displayed under Creator in Primo. I’m think we can probably move the
>> collection name to a 9xx field and create an index for local collection?
>> Meanwhile I know Alma has a built-in function for creating local
>> collections.
>>
>>
>>
>> I wonder if anyone would like to share how they treat their local
>> collection names? Do you use a separate field for it or include it as a
>> note? Or do you use the Alma built-in function and not adding the
>> collection name in the bib record at all?
>>
>>
>>
>> Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
>>
>>
>>
>> Xiping Liu
>>
>>
>>
>> Resource Description Librarian
>>
>> University of Houston Libraries
>>
>> 713-743-3990
>>
>> xliu47 at uh.edu
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> 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
>
> pronouns: she/her/hers
>
>
>
>

-- 
*Matthew Ducmanas*
*Special Collections Cataloging Librarian*


*Cataloging & Metadata ServicesTemple University Libraries215-204-2057*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20191031/f1b88e0b/attachment-0001.html>