FCLMID@NERVM.BITNET (Michele I. Dalehite 904-392-9020) (02/09/90)
Seven of the nine SUS libraries have just sent in their orders to begin the OCLC GOVDOC service as of the Jan. 1 start date. One of those (Univ. of Florida) is a regional depository. The remaining two may begin the service later in the year. We plan to load the records into the individual databases; some into separate processing units and some into the library's main (or only) processing unit. We will match on OCLC numbers where present to minimize duplication. Most of the libraries do not intend to have provisional records because there would be no easy way to match them to the OCLC records although we have had some discussion about creating a standard number out of the SuDoc number (i.e., repeating it in the 035/9?? fields) with the number normalized in some way (e.g., all spaces and punctuation removed). At a meeting we recently held to discuss some of these issues, a suggestion was made to use unlinked item records to circulate the items until the GPO record is loaded and to keep track of materials received to satisfy GPO's requirements to shelflist and inventory materials immediately upon arrival. Another library (Fla. State Univ.) plans to have the records loaded as "in process" and to change the status title by title as they have verified receipt of the materials. As the records are loaded, we will build a "tickler" index (i.e., an 035 field) that will contain something like "GPO yymmdd). As they change the status field, they will delete the 035 field. Over time, the index will identify records for which they have not confirmed receipt thus revealing either workflow errors, OCLC profile errors, or GPO shipping problems. Several of the libraries have indicated that they prefer not to have a new record with the same OCLC number overlay an old record; just a journal of the new record. About half of the libraries elected to get serials records and half didn't. About the same ratio are getting shelflist cards. All of the SUS libraries have some gov doc records in their databases. Two have been cataloging them title by title via OCLC all along (these libraries are 15-20 years old). For seven libraries, first Brodart and then MARCIVE retrospective records have been purchased and loaded. Gaps exist between the retrospective files and the OCLC service so another purchase of retrospective data needs to be done to fill those gaps. For all of the retrospective purchases, records were sent to OCLC to set holdings as is required by statewide resource sharing agreements. Michele Dalehite, FCLA 904-392-9020