We actively maintain our holdings in our local system only.  I'm not directly involved, but my understanding is that we send a monthly file of new or modified holdings to OCLC to update our LHRs there.  Developing this process took substantial staff resources but it was seen as worthwhile because of the ILL factor.

Robert Rendall
Principal Serials Cataloger
Original and Special Materials Cataloging, Columbia University Libraries
102 Butler Library, 535 West 114th Street, New York, NY 10027
tel.: 212 851 2449  fax: 212 854 5167

On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 2:38 PM, Kevin M Randall <kmr@northwestern.edu> wrote:

I'm on the same side as Steve regarding this matter. Maintaining serials holdings in our own local system is already quite labor-intensive as it is, so I just cannot imagine having to double the effort by also maintaining OCLC LHRs. Thus, in our situation, automated batch loads would be the only method I could see as justified.

 

Kevin M. Randall

Principal Serials Cataloger

Northwestern University Libraries

Northwestern University

www.library.northwestern.edu

kmr@northwestern.edu

847.491.2939

 

Proudly wearing the sensible shoes since 1978!

 

 

From: Serials in Libraries Discussion Forum [mailto:SERIALST@LISTSERV.NASIG.ORG] On Behalf Of Steve Oberg
Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 12:49 PM


To: SERIALST@LISTSERV.NASIG.ORG
Subject: Re: [SERIALST] LHRs

 

Christina is right that LHRs make ILL people happy. But ours were never consistently maintained to begin with and are therefore misleading at best, and I’m also not convinced that it makes good sense to do such double-work just for the sake of ILL. We already have too many places where we are either cleaning up or doing double-work and as much as I think ILL is important, I am not sure it justifies us doing so much extra. ILL would like us to continue to do serials check-in, for example, but we stopped doing that at my direction some years ago for similar reasons.

 

Now I’ll go sit in my corner and prepare to duck the various objects that ILL people may wish to throw at me.

 

Steve

 

On Jun 21, 2017, at 12:35 PM, McCawley, Christina <CMcCawley@WCUPA.EDU> wrote:

 

I’m on the other side of this issue because our ILL people really want that Holdings data in WorldCat.  So I do both. 

 

Christina McCawley

West Chester University

25 W. Rosedale Ave.

West Chester, PA 19383

 

From: Serials in Libraries Discussion Forum [mailto:SERIALST@LISTSERV.NASIG.ORG] On Behalf Of Steve Oberg
Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 1:27 PM
To: SERIALST@LISTSERV.NASIG.ORG
Subject: Re: [SERIALST] LHRs

 

Heck yeah. 

 

I’m not interested in maintaining holdings data in two places (at least) — WorldCat AND our local ILS (Voyager). There are a few local edge cases where we do but otherwise, I delete LHRs and instruct my staff to delete them whenever they come across them.

 

Steve

 

Steve Oberg
Assistant Professor of Library Science
Group Leader for Resource Description and Digital Initiatives
Wheaton College (IL)
+1 (630) 752-5852
 
NASIG President
<image001.png>

 


To unsubscribe from the SERIALST list, click the following link:
http://listserv.nasig.org/scripts/wa-NASIG.exe?SUBED1=SERIALST&A=1 [ listserv. nasig. org/scripts/wa-NASIG. exe?SUBED1=SERIALST&A=1 ] [ listserv. nasig. org/scripts/wa-NASIG. exe?SUBED1=SERIALST&A=1 ]



To unsubscribe from the SERIALST list, click the following link:
http://listserv.nasig.org/scripts/wa-NASIG.exe?SUBED1=SERIALST&A=1