Union List Format for Compact Discs Birdie MacLennan 30 Oct 1992 02:05 UTC

2 messages, 82 lines:

Date:         Thu, 29 Oct 1992 12:57:00 PDT
From:         Aimee Algier-Baxter <AALGIER@SCU.BITNET>
Subject:      journal titles on CDs

To add to Rosemary Valero's inquiry regarding union list holdings of
journals on CDs, I would also like to bring up how catalogers will be
handling CD's that include full image journals (multiple titles). Our
Business Bibliographer is getting ready to cancel 25,000 dollars worth
of business journals in order to buy a CD issued by ProQuest, which has
full image of alot of business journal titles. They are also offering a
workstation and laser printer to go along with it. To me, this is a serials
cataloger's nightmare. How are libraries going to document these holdings
in their local systems, especially if the CD cannot be mounted onto the
local system? Also, it is not clear whether or not the individual libraries
actually own the CD or if they need to be returned to the publisher as new
updates arrive. Could anyone cite some literature for me on this topic?
Thanks in advance.

Aimee Algier-Baxter
Serials Cataloger
Santa Clara University

Date:         Thu, 29 Oct 1992 19:21:00 EDT
From:         Johanna Bowen <BOWEN@SNYCORVA.BITNET>
Subject:      CD-ROM's and Union Listing

With reference to Rosemary Valero's query about CD-ROM's and Union
Listing I would like to contribute the following observations:

        1.  The first step in Union Listing CD-ROM's is deciding how
you want to treat serial CD-ROM's -- as computer files or as serials?
(Technically they are computer files but CONSER considered issues of
seriality to be primary, then OCLC decided to accept both types of
records, and now OCLC has at least two records for serial CD-ROM's.)

        2.  As to whether to indicate holdings in subfield "y" or in
subfield "n", I believe there is no real reason to use "n" to describe
CD-ROM subscription holdings. A quick glance at New York State's union
list (ulnyul) shows a variety of statements.  For example SilverPlatter's
ERIC has the following:
        =y 1966/75-     (a current subscription which began with the
                        retrospective disk)
        =n current only
        =n retains current 10 years
        =n For holdings consult Reference Desk
The =n notes are not exactly informative or useful.
The =y 1966/1975-  is in fact no longer accurate as SilverPlatter has
combined data and reissued the retrospective disk as 1966/1981. Are we
keeping our LDR's up to date?

        3.  For SilverPlatter's ERIC the computer file record on OCLC
(#15703784) has one library listed in NY. The serial record (#15535905)
has six NY listings.  I doubt sincerely that only seven libraries in
New York have this title.  Clearly CD-ROMS have not been systematically
cataloged and union listed.  As Serials librarians we should not view
union listing as merely an ILL tool.  The union lists are used regularly
by our Reference Department to help users find where a resource is
located. Perhaps Serials Librarians ought to finally tackle cataloging
and union listing the CD-ROMS that currently go directly from check-in
to the Reference Department.

        4.  On the issue of cataloging and union listing the full text
journals I personally don't think it is a good idea.  The full text is
on some CD-ROM's only for those articles which have been indexed.  This
is not the same thing as having the full journal. Also of concern is the
issue of how ILL feels about printing from the CD-ROM for lending.  In
short, we are not cataloging and union listing the journals, just the
CD-ROM title itself.

In terms of finally deciding what to do, Serials librarians dealing with
Union Lists will ultimately do well if they make a decision regarding
these issues and then apply that decision consistently for all titles

Johanna Bowen, Serials Librarian
SUNY College at Cortland