LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for CODE4LIB Archives


CODE4LIB Archives

CODE4LIB Archives


CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

CODE4LIB Home

CODE4LIB Home

CODE4LIB  October 2010

CODE4LIB October 2010

Subject:

Re: Help with DLF-ILS GetAvailability

From:

Owen Stephens <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Code for Libraries <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 21 Oct 2010 22:49:06 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (144 lines)

OK - thanks both will pursue this - taking on board Jonathan's points on the issues around this

Owen

Owen Stephens
Owen Stephens Consulting
Web: http://www.ostephens.com
Email: [log in to unmask]
Telephone: 0121 288 6936

On 21 Oct 2010, at 22:07, Walker, David wrote:

>> Yes - my reading was that dlf:holdings was for pure 'holdings' 
>> as opposed to 'availability'.
> 
> I would agree with Jonathan that putting a summary of item availability in <dlf:holdings> is not an abuse.
> 
> For example, ISO Holdings -- one of the schemas the DLF-ILS documents suggests using here -- has elements for things like:
> 
>  <holdings:copiesSummary>
>    <holdings:status>
>      <holdings:availableCount>
> 
> Very much the kind of summary information you are using.  Those are different from it's <holdings:copyInformation> element, which describes individual items.
> 
> So IMO it wouldn't be (much of) a stretch to express this in dlf:simpleavailability instead.
> 
> --Dave
> 
> ==================
> David Walker
> Library Web Services Manager
> California State University
> http://xerxes.calstate.edu
> ________________________________________
> From: Code for Libraries [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jonathan Rochkind [[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2010 1:26 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Help with DLF-ILS GetAvailability
> 
> I don't think that's an abuse.  I consider <dlf:holdings> to be for
> information about a "holdingset", or some collection of "items", while
> <dlf:item> is for information about an individual item.
> 
> I think regardless of what you do you are being over-optimistic in
> thinking that if you just "do dlf", your stuff will interchangeable with
> any other clients or servers "doing dlf". The spec is way too open-ended
> for that, it leaves a whole bunch of details not specified and up to the
> implementer.  For better or worse. I made more comments about this in
> the blog post I referenced earlier.
> 
> Jonathan
> 
> Owen Stephens wrote:
>> Thanks Dave,
>> 
>> Yes - my reading was that dlf:holdings was for pure 'holdings' as opposed to
>> 'availability'. We could put the simpleavailability in there I guess but as
>> you say since we are controlling both ends then there doesn't seem any point
>> in abusing it like that. The downside is we'd hoped to do something that
>> could be taken by other sites - the original plan was to use the Juice
>> framework - developed by Talis using jQuery to parse a standard availability
>> format so that this could then be applied easily in other environments.
>> Obviously we can still achieve the outcome we need for the immediate
>> requirements of the project by using a custom format.
>> 
>> Thanks again
>> 
>> Owen
>> 
>> 
>> On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 4:28 PM, Walker, David <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> Hey Owen,
>>> 
>>> Seems like the you could use the <dlf:holdings> element to hold this kind
>>> of individual library information.
>>> 
>>> The DLF-ILS documentation doesn't seem to think that you would use
>>> dlf:simpleavailability here, though, but rather MARC or ISO holdings
>>> schemas.
>>> 
>>> But if you're controlling both ends of the communication, I don't know if
>>> it really matters.
>>> 
>>> --Dave
>>> 
>>> ==================
>>> David Walker
>>> Library Web Services Manager
>>> California State University
>>> http://xerxes.calstate.edu
>>> ________________________________________
>>> From: Code for Libraries [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Owen
>>> Stephens [[log in to unmask]]
>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2010 12:22 PM
>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>> Subject: [CODE4LIB] Help with DLF-ILS GetAvailability
>>> 
>>> I'm working with the University of Oxford to look at integrating some
>>> library services into their VLE/Learning Management System (Sakai). One of
>>> the services is something that will give availability for items on a reading
>>> list in the VLE (the Sakai 'Citation Helper'), and I'm looking at the
>>> DLF-ILS GetAvailability specification to achieve this.
>>> 
>>> For physical items, the availability information I was hoping to use is
>>> expressed at the level of a physical collection. For example, if several
>>> college libraries within the University I have aggregated information that
>>> tells me the availability of the item in each of the college libraries.
>>> However, I don't have item level information.
>>> 
>>> I can see how I can use simpleavailability to say over the entire
>>> institution whether (e.g.) a book is available or not. However, I'm not
>>> clear I can express this in a more granular way (say availability on a
>>> library by library basis) except by going to item level. Also although it
>>> seems you can express multiple locations in simpleavailability, and multiple
>>> availabilitymsg, there is no way I can see to link these, so although I
>>> could list each location OK, I can't attach an availabilitymsg to a specific
>>> location (unless I only express one location).
>>> 
>>> Am I missing something, or is my interpretation correct?
>>> 
>>> Any other suggestions?
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> 
>>> Owen
>>> 
>>> PS also looked at DAIA which I like, but this (as far as I can tell) only
>>> allows availabitlity to be specified at the level of items
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Owen Stephens
>>> Owen Stephens Consulting
>>> Web: http://www.ostephens.com
>>> Email: [log in to unmask]
>>> Telephone: 0121 288 6936
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTS.CLIR.ORG

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager