If you are going to look into this, I would suggest also familiarizing yourself with access issues for special collection materials.

According to DACS ( accession restriction is required information.  That is, even if the collection is open to research, access information must be provided.  And of course, "open" in archives means reading room access only.

Many archival collections, especially official records, have complex access issues, however, these do fall into categories.  Access restrictions include periods of absolute restriction on access (embargo periods), periods during which they require permission to access (often this permission is a donor or donor's representative), or have time periods during which some categories of users are permitted access (official use only or subject of record only, often based on legal restrictions such as FERPA or HIPPA or security classification).  In addition, it is possible that parts of an archival resource are restricted and others are not, or parts are subject to one restriction and other parts are subject to other restrictions. Here's NARA's list: and here are NARA's instructions for applying it:

Here is another NARA list:

Kate Bowers
Collections Services Archivist for Metadata, Systems, and Standards
Harvard University Archives
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
voice: (617) 998-5238
fax: (617) 495-8011
Twitter: @k8_bowers

From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Jane Sandberg <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, December 30, 2016 5:47 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [BIBFRAME] How to describe complexities with bf:AccessPolicy?

Hello all,

I would like to learn more about the bf:AccessPolicy class. I didn't
notice any specifics within the ontology about how these policies are
to be modeled, and the only example I could find just hase the value
"unrestricted" [1].  Is anybody looking into making this class a bit
more robust, perhaps with their own ontology?

I am particularly interested in a use case in which a patron would
know whether or not they could access a physical item, and how they
would go about accessing it.  Take for example the BIBFRAME use case
of Alex's mom who is searching for copies of the Phantom Tollbooth
near her current location [2].  This use case is overly simple: Alex's
mom is probably not content just knowing that there are copies of the
book nearby; she probably would be more interested in a query that
returns nearby items that she could actually access.

This is complicated by the fact that Alex's mom could be looking for
any of a number of different types of access:

1) Checking out the item and taking it out of the library for a
certain amout of time

2) Checking out the item for use within the library (such as academic
libraries' textbook collections, or keys to study rooms, etc.)

3) Using the item within the library

4) Getting the library item delivered to her (a service that some
academic libraries offer to distance education students, some public
libraries offer to homebound patrons, and some corporate libraries

5) Getting the item delivered to another library by a courier (which
may take more time than Alex's mom would like)

6) Placing a hold on the item to check out later (which is encouraged
by some libraries, discouraged by others -- sometimes even with a
small fee for holds)

Additionally, here are some complexities that Alex's mom would face if
she lived in the county where I work:

1) Our county has a consortium of municipal libraries, rather than a
county-wide system.  So if Alex's mom didn't live in one of the cities
that pays taxes toward its own municipal library, she would have to
pay a non-resident fee before checking out any of those copies of the
Phantom Tollbooth that are housed at those municipal libraries.

2) The items might be checked out, damaged, or otherwise unavailable.

3) Some libraries don't participate in the courier service.  So,
depending on the library that holds the item, Alex's mom might have to
visit the owning library in person.

4) Each library has a different set of circulation and hold policies.

5) Perhaps Alex's mom has a blocking fine at one of the libraries, or
has been trespassed for violating some rule.  While the latter isn't
particularly likely, I don't believe that any item has a truly
"unrestricted" access policy.

So a much more useful query pattern for Alex's mom would include the
following sorts of WHERE statements:
* The bf:Item allows a type of access that interests Alex's mom
* Alex's mom is actually allowed to use that type of access
* Alex's mom can access that bf:Item in a reasonable amount of time

It would be very nice if bf:accessPolicy data could tell patrons what
they could and could not access, and when they could access
temporarily inaccessible or remote items.  Does anybody have any ideas
about how that might work?

Thanks for your help!




Jane Sandberg
Electronic Resources Librarian
Linn-Benton Community College
[log in to unmask] / 541-917-4655
Pronouns: she/her/hers or they/them/theirs