MULS Blog

Whether you attended one of our recent webinars or not, now is a great time to work on getting your Local Holdings Records in OCLC updated. It could be as simple as making sure that the subscriptions you've canceled in the past year have been closed in OCLC as well. Or it could be a more ambitious project to get your LHRs all updated. We know that libraries who update their holdings receive fewer misdirected ILL requests, so their fill rates are better and staff time is not wasted.

If you want to update your library's holdings in OCLC, the staff in the Minitex MULS office is ready to help you with any updating questions you may have. Whether you have general questions about your holdings in OCLC, or specific questions about how to handle a single record, we're happy to help you find the best way to represent your holdings.

You can contact Dave Linton by phone (612-624-3360/ 800-462-5348) or e-mail (linto001@umn.edu) whenever you'd like help working with your Local Holdings Records.

Posted by linto001 at 12:56 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Q:  Our library has holdings in multiple formats for a single publication.  How should we represent these holdings in our LHRs in OCLC?

 A.  It is possible (though not strictly according to standards) to represent your holdings in OCLC with a set of Local Holdings Records attached to a single bibliographic record.  Even though all the holdings end up together on the one bib record, it is still important to use separate LHRs for each collection and format.  This will naturally lead to more complexity in creating the Summary field for your library, though not necessarily to a more complex Summary holdings statement.

 For an example of this kind of holdings, see the TQI Local Holdings Records of  Nature.  (ISSN 0028-0836 / OCLC #1586310). 

When you look at this institution, you see a summary screen indicating multiple Local Holdings Records, each of which specifies a holding in a single format.  This allows us to code the physical description code (007) and collection and shelving information (both of which are in the 852) to be specified for each part of the holding without making any one of the LHRs overly complex.  Note that in the example, we have added a public note (863 $z) to the holdings, so that the different formats can be distinguished even in the summary display.

Among the most important codes to pay attention to are the lending and reproduction policy codes (elements 20 and 21 of the 008 field).  This is because OCLC's ILL deflection system looks at these codes and can override the general policy for an item based on the codes in the LHR.  When deflection looks at the OCLC Policies Directory to see whether an item may be loaned or reproduced, it checks the format of the bibliographic record to see which policies apply.  If you attach electronic holdings to a print record, the ILL deflection system will treat them as print holdings.  So, if you need to restrict borrowing based on format, you'll need to make sure the Lending and Reproduction policy codes are correctly coded in each LHR.

Note that while the collection of all the individual holdings could be complex, in this case, the net result is a fairly simple, open holding that starts in 1896 and continues into the present.  The note in the LHR Summary field indicates there are multiple formats, but doesn't specify which format corresponds to which years.  In another situation, you might want to be more specific.  The most important thing is to be specific in each LHR and to be consistent throughout your records.

Posted by linto001 at 10:52 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Q:  Our library has holdings in multiple formats for a single publication.  How should we represent these holdings in our LHRs in OCLC?

A:  According to the current cataloging standards, each holding should be attached to a bibliographic record that describes its physical format as well as its publication information and history.  This means that, to adhere to the standards, we should have each Local Holding Record attached to the bibliographic record that corresponds to the physical format of the holdings: print holdings on a print bib record, microfilm holdings on a microfilm record, etc. 

This standard is something that we at MINITEX have tried to encourage staff of MULS participating libraries to follow, so many MULS libraries already have holdings that fit this standard.  For an example of this kind of holdings, see the TQI Local Holdings Records on the print and electronic versions of  The Christian Science Monitor.  (ISSN 0882-7729 / OCLC #10969332 and OCLC #35351012)

The advantage of this method of reporting, of course, is that the bibliographic record carries all of the descriptive elements so searchers know about the format of the issues your library holds, or that describe differences between the original publication and a reproduction or alternate format.  Each holding can be updated independently, and OCLC ILL deflection system recognizes the holding format from the format code in the bib record, so it can apply the correct policies to any ILL request.

The major problem with this separate record reporting method is that we need to let folks know that your library has holdings attached to more than one record.  We supplement this information by including a cross reference note in the LHR that directs users to the other records and  holdings in other formats.  To make these notes as useful as possible in as many environments as possible, we've decided to identify these additional records by both ISSN and OCLC number.  So, for example, the holdings on the microfilm record would refer the reader to the print record and read something like:

"For hardcopy see ISSN 0041-2136 / OCLC #23154681."

We'd want to include the cross reference notes in both the LHR summary field and in the public note field ($z) of the 863.  And, if we had holdings only in a non-print format that reproduced a print publication (e.g. we hold only microfilm of a print publication), we'd put a LHR on the print record that referred searchers to our microfilm holdings.

Posted by linto001 at 3:31 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

In the 18 months since Local Holdings Maintenance migrated to the Connexion Browser, there has been a noticeable decline in the amount of LHR updates which are received in the MINITEX MULS office.  We’d like to get a better picture of what factors have led to this change in activity.  More importantly, we want to know whether there are changes we can make that would help our participating libraries keep holdings up-to-date.

Rather than guessing, we’d like to hear from our participating libraries to get a clearer picture of what factors have contributed to the decline we see in the number of Local Holdings Record updates.  If your library participates in the MULS union list, and does not directly update the libraries holdings in OCLC, we’d like to know

1. Does your library maintain a local record (as part of the catalog or separately) of serials holdings?  How is it updated, and how often?
2. Has your library sent updates to the MINITEX MULS office for updating in OCLC?  How recently?  Have you added or deleted titles from your serials collection since then?
3. What are the obstacles or factors that affect your ability to send updates to MULS? Do you see some way (or ways) that the MINITEX MULS unit could help make updating easier?

Remember, all libraries participating in the MULS union list group have committed to keeping their serial holdings information up-to-date. Libraries which have access to OCLC are supposed to receive training so that their staff may input and update their Local Holdings Records (LHRs) at their convenience. Libraries without access to OCLC are expected to send updates to their serial holdings to the MINITEX MULS office, where our staff will make the necessary changes to the libraries’ LHRs.

Over the years, the MINITEX MULS office has accepted updates from participating libraries in a number of formats. We have received e-mail messages, Word documents and spreadsheets. We have had libraries send updates on Holdings Update Forms, both in print and via the web. And, of course, we receive many updates in the form of holdings information printed from local system records.

Whether you have updates to send us or would like to know more about the updating service that MINITEX provides, we’d like to hear from you. Please contact Dave Linton in the MINITEX MULS office with your responses to any – or all – of these questions. We’d like to find out how we can help keep the holdings data in MULS accurate, so it can benefit our entire community.

Dave Linton (e-mail: linto001@umn.edu, phone: 612-624-3360 or 800-462-5348)

Posted by linto001 at 2:14 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Allen Ashman, Editor of the Kentucky Union List of Serials, reported on how Kentucky libraries have begun to use the “Reason for No” information provided in the WorldCat Resource Sharing Statistics to identify high priority LHRs for updating.  Library staff check their library’s reports for unfilled ILL entries where the “Reason for No” is listed as “Lacking,” e.g., the ILL staff could not find the particular item/volume requested.

In particular, if a title is requested repeatedly and the request is turned away because the item is “Lacking,” Ashman suggested that LHR maintenance staff check their holdings information in WorldCat to see if an inaccurate LHR is encouraging potential borrowers to seek volumes the library doesn’t have.  Of course, good LHRs don’t head off all bad requests, but, at least, they do provide solid info. for borrowers who perform basic holdings searches!

For more information about Ashman’s “Reason for No” presentation, contact Cecelia.  For more information about WorldCat Resource Sharing Statistics, contact the MINITEX BATS unit.

Posted by linto001 at 4:16 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

LHR Updating Service Available for Use

Automated LHR updating (officially entitled the OCLC Local Holdings Records Updating Service, or LHRUS) allows libraries participating in MULS and other OCLC-based Union List groups to provide summary or detailed holdings data from their local systems for OCLC to use to update their LHRs in WorldCat.  Several MINITEX area libraries have used the LHRUS in the past, and Judy Murran, OCLC Project Manager for LHRUS, said that many new libraries are making use of the service.

The project backlog, which had delayed processing of libraries’ holdings files, has been reduced greatly.  See

http://www.oclc.org/batchprocessing/options/holdings/localdatarecords/default.htm

for more information, or contact Cecelia Boone  in the MINITEX/MULS Office. 

Staff of MINITEX/MULS libraries can, of course, continue to update their LHRs manually online with the Connexion Browser.  Contact Dave Linton with your questions about manual updating.

Posted by linto001 at 3:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Q: Is there a way to automatically update our MULS records using data from our local system?

A: In the past, many libraries in our region updated holdings in OCLC using the Batch Updating service. Now that we have migrated Local Holdings Records out of Passport, the OCLC Local Holdings Batch Updating service is available again.

Libraries wanting to use this service do still need to deal with a couple of difficulties.

Continue reading "Updating Local holdings automatically" »

Posted by linto001 at 12:05 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Q: Can we delete holdings using the Connexion Client?

A: You can delete a Local Holdings Record at the same time you process a Cancel transaction on the bibliographic record, and that works in either the Connexion Browser or the Connexion Client. Similarly, the Connexion Browser prompts you to delete or save the catalog holdings when you delete the last LHR for your institution.

At this time, however, you can only create new LHRs or edit existing Local Holdings data via the Connexion Browser.

Posted by linto001 at 11:56 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Q: We used to send our updates to MINITEX to be entered into OCLC. Has that changed?

A: For libraries that are MULS participants, but are not OCLC Governing Members, it has been possible to send updates to the MINITEX MULS office for our staff to input. If you used to send updates to MINITEX, you may continue to do so.

Libraries that are OCLC governing members are expected to make their own updates via the OCLC Connexion Browser. However, those libraries may also arrange to send updates to the MINITEX MULS office for input by the MULS staff. This service is provided on a fee-for-service basis, and should be arranged in advance.

Continue reading "Sending updates to MINITEX MULS office" »

Posted by linto001 at 11:25 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)