4 messages, 88 lines:
--------------------------

Date:         Wed, 19 Aug 1992 13:33:00 EDT
From:         ELEANOR COOK <COOKEI@APPSTATE.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Faxon's SC-10 system & SERIALST discussions

In reply to Gaele's response to my reply to Martha Kellogg (good grief!)

Thanks, Gaele, that is nice to know. My concern merely is to keep the
"nitty gritty" to those of us to who need to talk SC-10ese. SC-10 is
a system that was developed long before current standards we now know
and enjoy; much of the jargon that goes along with it may be unintelligible
and possibly irritating to non SC-10 users. I don't see NOTIS, GEAC,
Innovative Interfaces, DRA or other specific system vendor questions
on SERIALST. And I don't expect to; they all have their own groups.

Sharing <general> news or questions about any system is fine, but I
would rather get into the details with users of any given system somewhere
else besides SERIALST.

I hope this makes sense; it is not an attempt to squelch any
discussion!

Eleanor Cook
Serials Librarian
Appalachian State University
Boone, NC 28608

cookei@appstate.bitnet
cookei@conrad.appstate.edu

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date:         Wed, 19 Aug 1992 14:48:21 -0400
From:         "Erika C. Linke" <el08+%ANDREW.CMU.EDU@CARNEGIE.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Faxon's SC-10 system & SERIALST discussions

I concur with Gaele Gillespie's comments about keeping
the discussion about SC-10 migration on SERIALST.  These
are the same reasons I had for keeping the discussion here.

-- Erika Linke
Head, Collections & Access
Carnegie Mellon University

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date:         Wed, 19 Aug 1992 15:24:00 EDT
From:         SMURDEN@VCUVAX.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Faxon's SC-10 system & SERIALST discussions

I'd like to echo Gaele's comment concerning Eleanor's suggestion - please
keep the discussion on SERIALST.  Although we are currently an SC-10 library,
and are not planning to convert to the new Faxon system (we're going to NOTIS
for serials check-in), I too like to know what is going on with these kinds
of decisions, who's doing what, and what the reasons are for doing it.
Besides, as long as the postings are correctly identified, we can all just
skip those topics that we don't want to read.  Thanks.

Steve Murden
Va. Commonwealth University
smurden@vcuvax.bitnet

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date:        Wed, 19 Aug 1992 22:13 EDT
From:        Birdie MacLennan <BMACLENN@UVMVM.BITNET>

Points from both sides of this argument are well taken.  There *are*
numerous other forums to discuss systems specific questions (e.g.,
NOTIS-L, DRA, GEAC, Innovative Interfaces, and probably others that
I haven't kept up with ...).  On the other hand, SERIALST has a broad
scope that pertains to almost any aspect of serials processing in
libraries.  I enjoy (and learn from) hearing about what others are
encountering in using various serials systems, and often have found
direct answers here to my NOTIS-related systems questions that have
have spared me from the NOTIS list, which can be very technical and
systems-persons oriented.  Afterall, we do tend to focus on the serials
aspects of these systems!

My sense is that if a topic gets too tedious, irritating, or redundant
for subscribers, they generally voice their opinion and move to turn the
issue(s) elsewhere or to private correspondence.

Also, there are several vendors who subscribe to SERIALST, and my
sense is that this is a good forum to make your voice and concerns
known to a broad spectrum of readers.

Birdie MacLennan
Serials Cataloger
University of Vermont