 |
 |
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 10:13 AM, Jonathan Rochkind <[log in to unmask]>wrote: > I'm not sure what you mean by "complete" holdings? The library holds the > entire run of the journal from the first issue printed to the last/current? > Or just holdings that dont' include "missing" statements? > Obviously, there has to some sort of holdings statement -- I'm presuming that something reasonably accurate is available. If there is no summary holdings statement, items aren't inventoried, but holdings are believed to be incomplete, there's not much to work with. As far as retrospectively getting data up to scratch in the case of hopeless situations, there are paths that make sense. For instance, retrospectively inventorying serials may be insane. However, from circ and ILL data, you should know which titles are actually consulted the most. Get those ones in shape first and work backwards. In a major academic library, it may be the case that some titles are *never* handled, but that doesn't cause problems if no one wants them. For low use resources, it can make more sense to just handle things manually. Perhaps other institutions have more easily parseable holdings data (or even > holdings data stored in structured form in the ILS) than mine. For mine, > even holdings that don't include "missing" are not feasibly reliably > parseable, I've tried. > Note that you can get structured holdings data from sources other than the library catalog -- if you know what's missing. Sounds like your situation is particularly challenging. But there are gains worth chasing. Service issues aside, problems like these raise existential questions. If we do an inadequate job of providing access, patrons will just turn to subscription databases and no one will even care about what we do or even if we're still around. Most major academic libraries never got their entire card collection in the online catalog. Patrons don't use that stuff anymore, and almost no one cares (even among librarians). It would be a mistake to think this can't happen again. kyle