Having received the recommendation from DMSC to proceed with using a single record for OhioLINK central, OSU investigated the impact this change would have on our activities where we to compile with this recommendation.
First, let me acknowledge that, in principle, we understand and accept the compelling idea of combining formats on a single record. Our public services staff also believe this would be an improvement. However, while the principle sounds good, the devil is in the details.
Our concerns follow:
- 1. Simplicity of displays — Implementing a single record will not necessarily simplify the browse display or the user's access to records. In the examples attached, going to a single record only reduces the browse display by one record.
One alternative means for improving user access is to remain with the multiple record strategy but to add the URL for the electronic version to all print records.
- 2. Staffing considerations — Going to a single record strategy means that it will be unlikely that cataloging can be purchased from TechPro. This has been an effective means of acquiring cataloging for the large volume of titles being added. With the single record approach, each library will need to modify its local records on a one by one basis. Also, a retrospective project to merge existing multiple records will take considerable staff time on each campus.
- 3. ILL Impact — while the improvement for PCIRC is mentioned, no investigation of the impact on the ILL process has been made. Adding holdings on OCLC to print records is likely to increase the ILL traffic since it will appear that the library holds print copies of the titles.
Recommendation: I have attached an additional document recommending that a small project be undertaken to develop sample records of each strategy for wide discussion within OhioLINK. We believe that this project could be conducted in the next 4-6 weeks. This approach would also ensure a broad discussion of the issues before a final decision is made.
|
