This is true - but if only we recorded even summary holdings statements for print journals in a machine parsable format it would be a real step forward - we could then answer the same question for print holding as Link servers tend to for electronic holdings (didn't we have a discussion about this a couple of years ago on hear?)
Owen
Owen Stephens
Assistant Director: eStrategy and Information Resources
Central Library
Imperial College London
South Kensington Campus
London
SW7 2AZ
t: +44 (0)20 7594 8829
e: o.stephens_at_imperial.ac.uk
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Next generation catalogs for libraries
> [mailto:NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Ross Singer
> Sent: 19 March 2009 14:01
> To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
> Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] Whose elephant is it, anyway? (the OLE project)
>
> It *is* one of the things that OpenURL is intended to solve, yes. But
> only on the 'request' end (e.g. here is how I ask you if you have
> Volume X, Issue Y of some resource).
>
> The problem is that very, very, very few ILSes have any capacity to
> 'answer' this request in any meaningful way. The information is just
> not stored in a way to allow for consistent response.
>
> The best one can generally hope is glean "real" serials holdings from
> the serials check-in history. But this assumes there's some
> standardized or consistent serials check-in process and only goes back
> to when the current system began checking in serials. If there was an
> ILS migration at any point, the 'historical record' is almost
> certainly only kept as summary text holdings.
>
> MFHD provides some standardization and consistency, but not only is
> this not supported on all ILSes, it's probably not the top priority of
> many institutions to go deep into their backfile and catalog all of
> the issues of all of their serials from the opening of the library to
> present.
>
> -Ross.
>
> On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 3:16 AM, Bernhard Eversberg <ev_at_biblio.tu-
> bs.de> wrote:
> > Tim McGeary wrote:
> >>
> >> ... To go even
> >> further, if I have this particular journal in print and 3 electronic
> >> versions, I'd like it to be clear to the user exactly which URL to
> >> access for volume X and issue Y.
> >>
> >> Now that said, the exact data model (including the abstract
> intellectual
> >> entity-relationship data model and the physical data description
> data
> >> model, among others) will be defined by Phase 2 Build Team that
> comes
> >> after us.
> >
> > Isn't that what the OpenURL-Standard is supposed to be for:
> >
> > http://www.exlibrisgroup.com/category/sfxopenurlsyntax
> >
> >
> > At the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek, it has been implemented and an
> > XML service has been configured to exploit the periodicals
> > data resources we have. These include detailed holdings data that
> > are formatted in ways to allow for algorithmic determination of
> > what a library actually has or what license they have for which
> > online parts of a periodical.
> >
> > Documentation is here:
> >
> >
> http://www.zeitschriftendatenbank.de/downloads/pdf/XMLDienst_Beschreibu
> ng.pdf
> >
> > And here:
> >
> > http://services.d-nb.de/fize-service/
> >
> > you can look at two sample queries.
> >
> > The open URL, if you want to try it out, is
> >
> > http://services.d-nb.de/fize-service/gvr/full.xml?
> >
> >
> > B.Eversberg
> >
Received on Thu Mar 19 2009 - 10:19:40 EDT