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
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.
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
Sociological abstracts (source CSA; also available via OVID/Silverplatter,
OCLC FirsSearch, etc.?)
CINAHL (source: CINAHL Information Systems; also available via OCLC
Education index/full-text/abstracts (source Wilson; also available via
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!
Peter V. Fletcher
Serials & Electronic Resources Catalog Librarian,
Bibliographer for Germanic and Russian Studies
Howard-Tilton Memorial Library
7001 Freret Street
New Orleans, LA 70118
Fax: (504) 862-8556
[log in to unmask]