Les, Steve, or anyone who might know --
Is there any progress on this or a meeting relative to it at ALA in
N.O.?  As Laura McElfresh responded on 4/12/06, Emory is interested in
seeing a move in this direction too.
Thanks,
Lauren

--
Lauren Corbett
Head of Acquisitions
Emory University -- Woodruff Library
ph: 404 712 1818
fax: 404 727 0408

Les Hawkins wrote:
> In August 2005 the following proposal was sent to several lists for
> comment. If I recall, we did not receive many replies. If there is
> interest in this idea, I can ask the PCC leadership to consider setting up
> a group to look into endorsing/pursuing this.
>
> Proposal for a Provider-Neutral Record for Online Integrating Resources
>
> As a follow-up to a discussion at the CONSER Operations meeting in May, I
> invite a wider discussion on a provider neutral approach to cataloging
> integrating resources. The CONSER meeting discussion summary is available
> from: http://www.loc.gov/acq/conser/conop2005.html#13
>
> This would be similar to the aggregator neutral cataloging policy for
> E-Serials. Peter Fletcher presented this topic at the Operations
> meeting and drafted the proposal below. Please read through the proposal
> below and respond to the list or contact Peter directly with your
> comments. Please excuse the cross-postings.
>
> Specific proposal: establish a provider-neutral record policy, similar to
> the CONSER aggregator-neutral policy, for online integrating resources,
> with the description based, if possible, on an original source of content
> such as the original publisher, or academic society or association. As
> with the CONSER policy, the record would contain information applicable to
> all provider versions, but information on the provider would only appear
> in citing which version the description was based on.
>
> Discussion: some online integrating resources, normally indexes/databases,
> have a single source, but they often have several service providers.
>
> Some examples:
>
> Medline (source: National Library of Medicine; also available via OCLC,
> EBSCO, OVID, Cambridge Scientific Abstracts, etc.)
>
> PAIS international (source Cambridge scientific abstracts; also available
> also via OCLC, OVID/Silverplatter, etc.?)
>
> Art index/fulltext/abstracts (source Wilson; also available via OCLC
> FirstSearch, others?)
>
> Sociological abstracts (source CSA; also available via OVID/Silverplatter,
> OCLC FirsSearch, etc.?)
>
> CINAHL (source: CINAHL Information Systems; also available via OCLC
> FirstSearch, OVID/Silverplatter)
>
> Education index/full-text/abstracts (source Wilson; also available via
> OCLC FirstSearch)
>
> ERIC is also a government source, but is available via many
> interfaces/providers such as EBSCO, OCLC FirstSearch, etc.
>
> Presently, in the utilities, there are many records representing these
> kinds of titles, generally with each based on a different provider, even
> though the essential content is the same. Are we and library patrons well
> served by providing these separate records? If we had one record
> representing these titles, it would save cataloging time when our
> libraries change provider packages or acquire new ones and thus better
> serve the patron with faster maintenance and acquisition of these
> records.  Also, if a library has more than one version of such a title,
> having one OPAC record with multiple URLs might serve patrons better than
> multiple records that contain subtle descriptive differences.
>
> Some specific differences between provider versions could be noted as
> such: "Some providers have ". Also, ISSN policy works in favor of a
> provider-neutral approach, since only one ISSN will be assigned to only
> one record that represents a particular electronic integrating resource
> title.  And, as with CONSER, for record consolidation, the 936 could be
> used to indicate which records will be deleted.
>
> Peter will be compiling responses to the proposal, please contact him
> directly if you intend to reply off list. I will be out of the office
> Aug. 8-19. Thanks!
>
> Les Hawkins
> CONSER Coordinator
> 202 707-5185
>
> Peter V. Fletcher
> Serials & Electronic Resources Catalog Librarian,
> Bibliographer for Germanic and Russian Studies
>
> Howard-Tilton Memorial Library
> Tulane University
> 7001 Freret Street
> New Orleans, LA 70118
> http://www.tulane.edu/~techserv/catdept.html (504) 862-8582
> Fax: (504) 862-8556
>
> fletcher at tulane.edu
>
> On Wed, 22 Feb 2006, Steven C Shadle wrote:
>
>
>> Nancy -- My understanding is that PCC has not endorsed
>> aggregator-neutral practice for integrating resources.  Because PCC
>> policy is OCLC policy, I would assume at this point you would create a
>> separate record (sigh).  Others who are more in touch with PCC
>> decision-making might have a better sense of any decision status.
>> --Steve
>>
>> Steve Shadle/Serials Access Librarian  *****  shadle@u.washington.edu
>> University of Washington Libraries      ***     Phone: (206) 685-3983
>> Seattle, WA 98195-2900                   *        Fax: (206) 685-8743
>>
>> On Wed, 22 Feb 2006, Nancy Chaffin wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Hi all
>>>
>>> I understand how the aggregator neutral record works for serials, but is there
>>> a similar rule/practice I am missing for integrating resources, specifically
>>> abstracting/indexing databases that are offered on different platforms?
>>>
>>> Example:
>>> Our library subscribes to Music Index Online directly from the publisher,
>>> Harmonie Park Press. However, we are moving our subscription to the Ebsco
>>> version.  There is no catalog record for the resource listing Ebsco as the
>>> publisher or with an Ebsco URL.  Should I use the record for Harmonie, or
>>> create a new one for Ebsco?
>>>
>>> TIA,
>>>
>>> Nancy
>>> --
>>> Nancy J. Chaffin
>>> Metadata Librarian
>>> Colorado State University Libraries
>>> Fort Collins, CO 80523-1019
>>>
>>> voice:  970.491.1847
>>> fax:    970.491.4661
>>> e-mail: Nancy.Chaffin@colostate.edu
>>>
>>>

--
Lauren Corbett
Head of Acquisitions
Emory University -- Woodruff Library
ph: 404 712 1818
fax: 404 727 0408