[587] in ad-lib
Advance detail
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (ninadm@MIT.EDU)
Thu May 11 14:51:10 1995
From: ninadm@MIT.EDU
To: opac-lib@MIT.EDU, psac-lib@MIT.EDU, cmg-lib@MIT.EDU
Date: Thu, 11 May 1995 14:50:33 EDT
Hello all. David and I agree that our groups (PSAC, CMG, and the OPAC
implementation group) all have some interest in an imminent Advance
decision. Since I know we all like to avoid meetings if we can, I'd
like to describe the problem and see if we can come to an agreement
electronically.
THE PROBLEM.
As you all know, in the old Geac system, the location and physical
format of each item in our collections are defined by codes for
location and material type. In Advance, it works somewhat
differently. Each item is assigned a "sublocation" (and these will be
the names of our library units) and a "collection" (these are
locations within each unit). In many cases, items are also assigned
"call number prefixes"; these can be used to define the location more
specifically, or to identify the physical format of the item.
With me so far?
Now. In the OPAC, there is a way to define the parameters of a search
by a "qualifier." Any value which is used as a "sublocation,"
"collection," or "call number prefix" can be defined as a qualifier.
I used to think -- and indeed some of you have heard me say -- that
ANY sublocation, collection, or call # prefix could automatically be
used as a "qualifier" in setting OPAC parameters. It turns out that I
was wrong. We must decide which of these values we want Grant to set
up as qualifiers for OPAC searching. Grant tells me that setting up
qualifiers is considerable work, and that having a huge body of them
may affect the overall performance of the OPAC, so we should be
conservative in selecting them, at the same time making sure that our
needs and the needs of library users will be met.
EXAMPLES.
It's clear to me that the names of all library divisions and branches
must be qualifiers. Everyone will want to qualify searches by the
names of library units!
The Music Library has for years been begging for a way to limit
searches to scores or CDs. This will allow us to do so.
MIT theses will have "thesis" as a call number prefix, so this will
help us find them.
On the other hand, I (personally) think we can dispense with the
ability to qualify searches by "precat." Even "reference," while it
might come in handy, is something we could probably do without.
In other words, we need to decide which of our
locations/collections/formats will be available for users in
qualifying their OPAC searches.
THE CRUX OF THE MATTER.
So, do we think we can wrestle with this online? If the above
explanation was clear, and if you think we can move ahead on it
without having to meet (much as that would be a pleasure!), I'll send
you all a complete list of the sublocations, collections, and call #
prefixes, and we can go to town. Otherwise, I'll try to pull together
a meeting.
Thanks for your attention.
Nina
