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

[Liu, Xiping]

Thank you all for your helpful feedback! Will bring this back to discuss with my colleagues to figure out the best solution for us. Using a 9xx field seems like a good possibility for us, because we are trying to avoid having the collection name listed under creator/author.

For those of you who are interested in Alma’s built-in collection function. Here is the documentation for it:
https://knowledge.exlibrisgroup.com/Alma/Product_Documentation/010Alma_Online_Help_(English)/040Resource_Management/050Inventory/050Managing_Collections

It seems to offer better visual for browsing.

Thanks,
Xiping


From: DCRM-L <dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu> On Behalf Of Fors, Lynne D
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2019 12:49 PM
To: DCRM Users' Group <dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu>
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Question about local collection name in Alma

Posting on behalf of our department head at William & Mary Libraries:

We're using Alma collections to manage our rare books. There's one big collection (all rare books) with sub-collections for all the named collections. On the public side, it looks like this. https://catalog.libraries.wm.edu/primo-explore/collectionDiscovery?vid=01COWM_WM_NEWUI&collectionId=81756339500003196&lang=en_US

Here's what we do in Alma. See screenshots below.

  *   Each of our named collections in Rare Books has its own location in Alma, (Bruton Parish Library, Blow Family Library, Chapin-Horowitz Dog Book Collection, etc.)
  *   We've set up logical sets based on each location
  *   Each month, everything in the logical set is added to the corresponding collection in Alma
  *   Alma collection has associated text describing the collection and a thumbnail image
  *   Patrons can browse collections through the Rare Books at Swem webpage
  *   Note: We have also added a 710 field for the collection to each bib record. This does not impact the Alma collection functionality at all. It provides an access point  for browsing and (we hope) it will migrate to our next system because it is a standard MARC field.
On the Alma side, it looks like this. There's one big collection (all rare books):

[cid:d6481bb4-b367-4315-8a13-f89869e682e8]

And here are the subcollections for each of our named collections:

[cid:b913f095-0639-4093-a1a9-a410d620a434]



Lynne Fors
Cataloging & Metadata Specialist
Earl Gregg Swem Library
William & Mary
P.O. Box 8794
Williamsburg, VA 23187
(757) 221-1698
ldfors at wm.edu<mailto:ldfors at wm.edu>

From: DCRM-L <dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu<mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu>> On Behalf Of Liu, Xiping
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2019 2:32 PM
To: DCRM Users' Group <dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu<mailto:dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu>>
Subject: [DCRM-L] Question about local collection name in Alma

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<mailto:xliu47 at uh.edu>


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20191031/b60c79e7/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 86189 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20191031/b60c79e7/attachment-0002.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 177912 bytes
Desc: image002.png
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20191031/b60c79e7/attachment-0003.png>