Serials Working Group
July 3, 2001

Present: Rachel Boyd, Pam Chu (for Aaron Bales), Barbara Cole,
Barbara Connelly, Diane Gram, Anastasia Guimares, Belinda Hoffman, Mary Lehman, Robin Lisek, Pat Loghry, Karen Malling, Pam Nicholas, Jayne Schlutt, Lisa Steinbarger, Deb Webb, LaDonna Weeks

NEW PROCEDURE FOR BINDING IN ALEPH (Lisa Steinbarger)


Lisa stated that this discussion does not relate to a new procedure but rather to the use of the Duplicate button in the Aleph Items Application. Everyone using the Duplicate button must be aware that the "Issue Date" and the "Expected Arrival Date" carry over to the new Item form. If those
dates are not reset at 00/00/0000 the new Item form may not display in the Web OPAC or it could display as "Expected Not Arrived". Also, the volume, which is on the shelf, may appear on the Serial Acquistions claim report.
This functionality applies to the 14.2 release as well. When binding procedures to reflect any 14.2 changes, they will include information on the Duplicate function.
Discussion focused on how to alert everyone to the need for zeroing the two dates. If a message is addressed to those who do binding, then it will probably be ignored by those who do use the Duplicate button but who don't actually deal with binding. The solution seems to be two messages,
one addressed to those who are binding issues and another to those who
use the Duplicate button.

TRANSFER OF TITLE (Jayne Schlutt)

Jayne stressed the need to fill out a Transfer Request Form so that Serials records can be modified to reflect changes. Serials has become aware of a number of changes from original assessments made when preparing for Aleph but they have received no information about those changes. When asked how transfers should be handled, Jayne used Life Sciences as an example. Based on the "Gloria Cudney days", Life Sciences should send a request form to CADM (now DADM). That form, which should reflect complete information (any fund change for example) would then go back to Serials so that Serials can note changes and begin to act on them.

REPORT ON RFI (Pat Loghry)

The decision has been made to switch vendors from Faxon to Swets Blackwell.

REPORT ON WORKFLOW FOR VENDOR SWITCH (Pam Nicholas)

The process is in place with various projects coming up. All Faxon orders have been cancelled and new orders created which will be sent Swets Blackwell in 2002. One project coming up will be clean-up where orders have been placed but nothing received since Aleph has been in place. Current orders will be cancelled and new orders will not be placed without a selector's review and request to continue to try to get a title. Mary Lehman asked why the cancellation/cessation procedures already in place would not meet the needs for this kind of clean-up. Pat Loghry said that is is tied in with Gay Dannelly's efforts to simplify accounting prodecures. The timing of this project is uncertain. Pam Nicholas said that we will be working with Faxon for at least the next six months before all dealings with them would be adjusted.

REPORT ON CLAIMS (Belinda Hoffman)

Serials initiated around 2000 claims in June. Deb Webb thanked those efforts, saying that Architecture has found that when they become aware of a missing title, the claim has already been made. If a claim is made on an item which is in hand for binding purposes, Belinda needs to be told so that the claim can be removed from the item. Currently there is no automatic change made to the claim statement on receipt of the item so the claim must be removed manually. Serials is making a real effort to check for outstanding claims as material is checked in but some may be missed. Binding seems a good opportunity to catch any items that still show a claim but have actually been received. Pam noted that Aleph 14.2 will have few Serials Module enhancements. Aleph plans to rewrite the Serials Module in 2003 so is not making many changes until focusing on a complete rewrite.
Belinda noted that a claim could be placed on the Acquisition order using the claims portion of the order form. A note could be made in triggers for information.

OPEN DISCUSSION

Pat stated that she would be moving to Jean McManus' office but that no time for the move had been set.
The question of putting 14.2 into Production was raised. Pam Nicholas said that a decision would be made in the next several weeks whether or not to defer the 14.2 launch.

Barbara Connelly initiated a discussion of what SWG should hope to accomplish. A number of suggestions were made about the group being a policy making body or at least a forum in which procedures could be developed with all relevant parties involved. Pat Loghry noted that everyone would have to be responsible for bringing concerns forward so that agendas could be developed accordingly. The SWG listserv could be used for background information contributing to the development of agenda items.

Diane Gram asked about the possibility of meeting at 2 rather than 1:30, given the difficulty of covering Branches over lunch time. Barbara Connelly has agreed to schedule meetings through December for the first Tuesday of every month through Corporate Time. She will explore availability of a place to meet which would allow meetings to begin at 2.

The meeting adjourned at 2:30.

Rachel Boyd