This article was downloaded by: [Stony Brook University]On: 29 October 2014, At: 03:20Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

The Serials Librarian: From thePrinted Page to the Digital AgePublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wser20

Keeping the Jell-O® Nailedto the Wall: Maintaining andManaging the Virtual CollectionBetty Landesman aa Gelman Library , George Washington University ,Washington, DC, USAPublished online: 17 Oct 2008.

To cite this article: Betty Landesman (1997) Keeping the Jell-O® Nailed to the Wall:Maintaining and Managing the Virtual Collection, The Serials Librarian: From thePrinted Page to the Digital Age, 30:3-4, 137-147, DOI: 10.1300/J123v30n03_17

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J123v30n03_17

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of theContent should not be relied upon and should be independently verified withprimary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of theContent.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ston

y B

rook

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

3:20

29

Oct

ober

201

4

Keeping the Jell-08 Nailed to the Wall: Maintaining and Managing

the Virtual Collection

Betty Landesman

Following Maggie's advice, we have decided that we will collect elec- tronic resources, and we have used our professional hunting and gathering skills to select the resources appropriate to our users. NOW MT??!!

One of the most important roles a library has always had is to provide access to the materials in their collections. In recent years, this role has expanded to include information that may not be in the collections them- selves but which su~plements them. In order for the library's users to take advantage of this i&ormation, it must be organized and bibliographically controlled-a.k.a. cataloged-so that users know that it exists, why they would want it, and how70 get it.

Michael Gomap has likened electronic resources.to an "uncharted wilderness":

The net is like a huge vandalized library. Someone has destroyed the catalog and removed the front matter, indexes, etc., from hundreds of thousands of books and tom and scattered what remains . . . and the walls are covered in graffiti. Surfing is the process of sifting rhrough this disorganized mess in the hope of coming across some useful

Betty Landesman is Coordinator for Systems Planning, Gelman Library, George Washington University, Washington, DC.

D 1997 by the North American Serials Interest Group, Inc. All rights reserved. [Hawonh co-indexing entry note]: "Keeping the Jell-OQ Nailed to the Wall: Maintnining and

Managing the Virtual Collection." L a n h n , Betty. Co-published simultaneously in fie Serials Librarian (The Haworth Press. Inc.) Vol. 30. No. 314. 1997, pp. 137-147: and: Pioneering New Serials Fmntien: Fmm Pemglyphs 10 Cykrseriols (ed: Christine Christiansen and Cecilia Leuhem) The Hawonh Press. Inc., 1997. pp. 137-147. Single or multiple capies of this article sn available for a fee from The Hawonh Oocument Delimy Service [1%00342-%78.9:00 am - S:00 p.m. (EST). E-mail address: getinfo@hnworth.mm].

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ston

y B

rook

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

3:20

29

Oct

ober

201

4

138 PIONEERING NEW S E W FRONTIERS

fragments of text and images that can be related to other fragments. The net is even worse than a vandalized libtary because thousands of additional unorganized fragments are added daily by the myriad cranks, sages, and persons with time on their hands who launch their unfiltered messages into cyberspace.'

The best of the growing number of Internet "catalogs" (like Yahoo) and " s m h engines" (like Alta Vita) do not use a controlled vocabulary or support field searching in the same way that our catalogs and indexes do. Even with developments in relevancy ranking, and with the most skillful Boolean qualification, a search for information using an Internet s m h engine often yields a vast number of hits, many of which are not what the searcher wants or needs. This is akin to the patrons who approach our online catalog terminals and perform a keyword search on "United States," and who then scroll through thousands of index entries happy that they are finding so much information. And we have actually selecred the material in the catalog, so that this (albeit vast) subset of the knowledge universe is at least comprised of material that we thought would be "good" in terms of supporting our users' needs: When out on the n& they are happily fmdjng all this STUFF and may not have the information literacy skills to determine what is good. It is our responsibility to point them in the direction of the "good" stuff.

Increasingly, libraries are creating or contributing to directories of selected Internet resources on gopher servers or World Wide Web home pages. These are often organized by subject A few examples of the many that are available are those of North Carolha State University CURL: hVJ/ www.lib.ncsu.edu~'disciplines; go to the section called "Internet Resources organized by Subject"); the University of Pennsylvania (URL: httpylwww. libmy.upenneduiresourcsl~ecthtml); tk University of Bu&lo (URL: httpYhin~.buffalo.eduflibraries/~res~urces/ej~ds); and the University of Tennessee, Knoxville (URL: h t t p J / ~ ~ ~ r . I i b . ~ e d u / E l e c t r o n i C - J o ~ ejournals.hrml#subject). These all represent titles organized by subjects assigned by the library staff, rather than pointers to subject lists organized by other agencies, e.g., the WWW V i Library (URL: http://www. edoc.com/ejouraal). Of the sampling above, only University of Tennessee, Knoxville's had a description of the provenance or content of many of the titles at the time of writing thii paper. A simple title entry in these subject lists is more the norm. The CIC Electronic Journals Collection does have bibliographic records cataloged by the member libraries; I will discuss this collection in greater detail later.

However, the library gopher or web site is not the same as the library online catalog. Libraries which have electronic resources onsite-mostly

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ston

y B

rook

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

3:20

29

Oct

ober

201

4

Concurrent Session 11: Order Oul ojChaos 139

CD-ROM databases, but also electronic journals which have been loaded on a local server-have usually included these titles in their catalogs with- out hesitation. These titles are part of the collection; they are physically there. The question of whether or not to provide catalog records for elec- tronic resources that are housed on a remote computer, somewhere "out there," has generated a great deal of discussion as to the technical, staff- ing, and philosophical issues involved.

As Martha Hruska puts it, "It is a challenge to determine how to manage something the library does not own, something that does not come in a container that can be controlled. It is most challenging to determine how this type of electronic digital entity can be physically described in a bibliographic record in the OPAC."2 Thornier than the literal questions of how to formulate a bibliographic description for this type of material, and of envisioning the nature of catalog maintenance in this context, has been the bottom-line question of whether the catalog should contain records for material the library does not own. Is it an inventory of the library's collec- tions, or a gateway to global information?

Hruska's article is one of five contributions to a "Balance Point" col- umn in the winter 1995 issue of Serials Review entitled "Cataloging Remote-Access Electronic Serials: Rethinking the Role of the OPAC." Eric Lease Morgan redefines the catalog as a finding aid. "a tool designed to help a defined set of people locate information in a comprehensive collection of dataw3 Since there is an increasing amount of usehl information available via the Internet, libraries need to provide access to it in order to best serve their users. Allison Mook Sleeman states that Inter- net materials selected by library staff should be considered as part of the collection, and therefore made accessible through complete catalog records with subject headings.4 Wayne Jones echoes both views: although the library is unable to exercise the same degree of bibliographic and archival control over titles maintained at a different site as it would for titles it holds within its walls, the quantity of information on the Internet and the lack of good searching tools make the catalog "an even more important means to help users dig in those mine^."^

Regina Reynolds, however, analyzes the potential pitfalls of this approach. If the library is not accessing sites linked to on a regular basis, changes that are not detected will cause retrieval failures and threaten the credibility of the catalog. The title on a remote gopher menu may not be the one the local cataloger would use when working from the chief source of information. A catalog is different from a bibliography; the catalog "has to serve not on1 the patron's needs but the library's own need to know what it holds.''dlWhile acknowledging the inevitability and indeed

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ston

y B

rook

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

3:20

29

Oct

ober

201

4

140 PIONEERING NEW SERIALS FRONTIERS

the need to shift from the catalog-as-inventory to the catalog-as-gateway approach, Reynolds cautions wisely that we need to make clear in our records which titles we have control over and which we do not.

Despite these valid concerns, I believe that it is necessary to provide catalog records for the electronic resources to which we choose to steer our patrons. We all subscribe to indexes that include citations to journals we do not have. Many of us now have these indexes tapeloaded into our online systems. We are also increasingly providing links to external data- bases such as Uncover and Firstsearch. When a patron walks up to a public terminal in our libraries, or dials in to the library's online system, she sees a menu of database choices. Only one of these is the literal catalog. But to the patron, the "catalog" is what they see on the menu screen. We have put these additional databases up on our "catalogs" in order to provide more information to our users. There are sometimes problems with remote servers, or with the Internet, that impede access to some of these databases. Few of our patrons understand the distinction, and hold us accountable for service to everything "in the catalog." We put them on the menu, nevertheless, because it is in the best interests of our patrons. I submit that we have already breached the wall. We understand the distinction between our catalogs and the other items on our system screens, but our patrons neither understand it nor care to. So when we consciously select an electronic resource, we should proceed to "do it right" and provide a level of bibliographic control that will benefit both our users and ourselves.

The electronic resources to which we provide access are no longer limited to freebies, some of which may have uncertain reliability. Libraries are increasingly paying for subscriptions to commercially-published elec- tronic journals, which include as part of the price some level of account- ability on the part of the vendor. If we pay for a journal subscription, we should catalog the journal. Furthermore, we may now have both print and electronic versions of the same title, or the electronic version has super- seded the print. If the records for the print and electronic version are not in the same place, we cannot provide the necessary explanatory links between the versions to allow our patrons to fmd what they need.'

Following the standard cataloging practice we employ for bibliographic records in our online systems provides us with an opportunity for fuller description and more precise and controlled retrieval than is typically available through an Internet search engine. We use controlled subject headings. Patrons can use existing OPAC searching techniques, and we can supply information on how to get to the resources. The inclusion of

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ston

y B

rook

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

3:20

29

Oct

ober

201

4

Concurrent Session II: Order Our ofChaos 141

specific, selected electronic resources in the catalog helps library staff identify titles that patrons will ask about. We are catalog users, too!

The library's catalog should be a center of research. If we do not provide access to all the information our users need, they will either miss but or they will bypass us. Most of us are in a transitional stage regarding ow online systems' capabilities and hardware requirements: we are mov- ing towards a graphical catalog environment, but still have many text- based terminals. Likewise, our patrons are increasingly Internet-connected but not necessarily there yet. At present, most of ow users can access our catalogs remotely with relative ease; not all can get at the Web. And if we do not provide our patrons with the information they need, someone else wiK8

Libraries need to keep up with changing times and technology. Our users expect it, and we expect it of ourselves. While few installed catalogs currently support "hot links" (the ability to find an Intemet resource in the OPAC, click on a hypertext link provided in the record, and be taken directly to that resource), most will, and soon. We want to be ready when the capability is t h e r m d that means making sure the appropriate records are in the database.

Now that that's settled, just do it! Seriously, though, the enabling infra- structure for catalopine. electronic resources is at last moving from anguished debate inti iiplementation. Cataloging guidelines are available. CONSER has developed policies for cataloging remote access computer file serials; Module 31 ofthe CONSER ~a&lo& Manual is accessible via the ~nternet.~ OCLC also developed pdelines for cataloging Internet resources as part of its Intercat project. O Individual libraries have made their internal cataloging policies and procedures available for consultation by others.''

Necessary changes to the MARC format have also been made. The 856 field has been defined for the description of electronic location and access. Furthermore, it has now been implemented by the bibliographic utilities and many local systems, so that it can be used in cataloging records. Format integration means that we are no longer required to choose between,the serial and computer file formats in order to catalog a title, and are finally able to have a 538 "System Details Information" note in a serial record.

We are also seeing the contribution of shared cataloging records to national databases. The Committee on Institutional Cooperation (CIC) has an Electronic Journals Collection which is cataloeed bv librarians of the member universities. The cataloging records are Lontriiuted to 0 c ~ C . l ~ OCLC itself has sponsored the Intemet Cataloging Project to create Inter-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ston

y B

rook

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

3:20

29

Oct

ober

201

4

142 PIONEERING NEW SERIALS FRONTIERS

Cat, a catalog of Internet resources that have been selected and cataloged by OCLC member libraries participating in the project.I3 These shared databases are in their formative stages. They are still far from the critical mass of records which would enable libraries to mainstream electronic resources into their regular copy cataloging process. But they are an excel- lent start.

This is not to say that no improvements are needed. I spoke earlier of the ability to use a controlled vocabulary in subject analysis. Our familiar Library of Congress Subject Headings, however, are not always sufficient to describe the material we have been cataloging in the past. The length of time it takes to add terms to the LCSH makes it problematic when applied to the swiftly moving target of the 1nternet.I4 Some recommended changes to AACR2's Chapter 9, for example the expansion of the list of descriptors of file characteristics to include terms such as "electronic 'ournal" and

3' "bibliographic database," have not yet been approved.' The values defined in the fa t indicator of the 856 field for the access method are: Ernail, FTP, Remote login (Telnet), and "Method specified in subfield 2" -i.e., "Other." The access methods defined do not represent the majority of the resources we are cataloging today.

Nor, possibly, do the cataloging rules and guidelines fit all our needs. There is only one GMD authorized for electronic resources: [computer file]. The words "computer file" do not necessarily evoke the nature of what we are cataloging. I have already seen at least one institution make the decision that the term does not meet their users' needs; they are using the GMD [electronic serial] instead and this GMD is in their contributed OCLC records. The cataloging guidelines provide for the use of a single bibliographic record for an electronic resource, with multiple 856 fields to accommodate multiple forms of access. The record for the electronic version is nonetheless separate from the record for the print version. This perpetuates the difficulty facing our patrons in locating a desired issue of a title into the new environment. Some libraries are already making the decision to add the electronic version as another "copy" of the print in their online catalons. for the benefit of their own Datrons. This will have long-term irnplica~ohs for shared bibliographic dakbases, as libraries will have to continue to choose between following rules they believe provide a disservice to their own users, cataloging one way for their local system and another for the world at large, or cataloging only one way and choos- ing the local system as the higher priority. It is difficult for the cataloging rules to evolve as quickly as the medium.

The fmal improvement needed is not a cataloging issue but a hardware and software issue. In order to take the fdlest advantage of online catalog

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ston

y B

rook

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

3:20

29

Oct

ober

201

4

Concurrent Session 11: Order Out of Chaos 143

records for Internet resources, our systems vendors will need to support the "hot links" to those resources from the OPAC. And, probably more difficult to achieve, we will need to replace all of our text-based "dumb" terminals with graphically-capable microcomputers to be able to execute those links. This will require a considerable investment of money for equipment, telecommunications, and computer support. I hope that the potential for providing a new dimension of user service-predicated of course on the availability of those hot-linkable records in ow catalogscan help leverage the necessary funding for this investment.

Providing records in the catalog for electronic serials has the same pitfalls for the inexpert researcher as providing records for print serials: the patron thinks that going to the journal whose title she found and browsing through it is how to do research on that subject. This behavior has always challenged our user education skills, and will continue to do so. One of the biggest payoffs to having serial records in the online catalog has been the ability to link to those records from locally mounted indexes the "hook to holdings" where a user finds a citation and can see if the library has (or in this case, provides access to) the title and issue being cited. Abstracting and indexing services are not yet picking up electronic resources to any great degree. As for the issue-specific information, 1 think it unrealistic to try to provide detailed holdings unless the library is down- loading each issue. This may not be permissible for all journals, and in any case is a labor- and space-intensive effort. It is likely, therefore, that we will be providing open-ended holdings statements instead of detailed 239.44 Level 4 holdings.

As the indexing of electronic resources increases, however, I would like to encourage librarians and the A&I database vendors, whose customers we are, to think about the traditional online "hook" using the ISSN. Even though ow records for print, microfilm, and microfiche holdings are sepa- rate, they share a common ISSN. Therefore the user can see whether the library has the journal being cited, no matter what format it is in. The electronic version of the same title is considered a different "edition," and will have a different ISSN. If the library has the electronic version of a serial being cited, and not its print equivalent, how will the user know the library has it?

One more consideration in following ow standard practices is in the area of resource sharing. Traditional cataloging workflow typically includes adding the library's holding symbol to a record in a bibliographic utility to promote resource sharing. If the holding symbol is not added, the library is in violation of its participation agreement with the utility. On the other hand, we probably don't want our holding symbol appearing for

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ston

y B

rook

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

3:20

29

Oct

ober

201

4

144 PIONEERING NEW SERIALS FRONTIERS

titles we are unable to lend. This conundrum, along with the multiple record question and the detailed holding question and the ISSN question and many other questions, provides areas for consideration as we try to adapt traditional practices to the not-yet-traditional electronic environ- ment.

Just like our more tangible collections, the virtual ones require mainte- nance. If the library has decided to check in each issue, staff need to know that a new one is out there to be checked in. Sometimes there is an alert sent via E-mail; sometimes staff will need to monitor assigned sites to see if there is anything new. There is some, but not a great deal of, automated assistance in the monitoring process. Eric Lease Morgan developed a software program called "Mr. Serials" which extracts bibliographic information from incoming electronic serials and adds it to the library's locally maintained archive.16 However, the progmm only handles serials received via E-mail, and does not address serials accessed via other meth- ods such as gopher or the World Wide Web.

Claiming of missing issues is not qualitatively different from claiming print joumals-staff do not see those either! The difference is perhaps in how they go about identifying them. The maintenance of the virtual serials collection requires a great deal of staff time, certainly, but even more important is the different skill set required of a check-in clerk. Accessing UlU's; downloading binary files; following links-these require an entirely new dimension of training. One of our biggest concerns is ensuring the integrity of the links to resoucces that we "wllect." Addresses of remote sewem are prone to change, and links must therefore be checked on a regular basis. There is some s o b available to assist in this process. One l i t of "validation checkers" is available via Yahoo (URL: http:llwww.yahoo.com/ Computas-mdmpuIntemet/Softwaren>ata-Fo~Nalidationftwaren>ataQ1eckers), and another from Webreference (URL: http:/lwebreference.comlhtm1I validation.htm1). Most of these programs validate HTML coding, but some do checking of links. Nevertheless, this is largely a process that needs an investment of staff time and training, and is likely to remain so. A benefit of integrating electronic resources into the library's online system is the ability to utilize the same acquisitions tools (e.g., reports triggered by a library-specified action date) as are available to assist us with mainte- nance of the print collection.

In order to perform the new level of tasks required to maintain elec- tronic resources, library staff will require not only training but a comput- ing and telecommunications infrasbucture to support the work they now have to do. Good, fast, Internet-connected PC's will have to replace "dumb" terminals in staff areas, or staff will be unable to perform their

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ston

y B

rook

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

3:20

29

Oct

ober

201

4

Concurrent Session If: Order Out of Chaos 145

jobs effectively. The need to maximize staff productivity can, I hope, help to leverage the hardware investment required to provide the necessary working environment in technical services.

Since locations can change so readily, standards developments are under way to provide more persistent links than the URL. The Uniform Resource ldentifier Working Group of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), which defined the URL, is now working on a standard for a Uniform Resource Name (URN). The idea is to define a text string that unambiguously identifies an Internet resource independent of its location. This string would then be used by a resolution service, which would accept the URN and return one or more URL's. l7 OCLC has developed the PURL (Persistent Uniform Resource Locator, or Persistent URL), which points to an intermediate resolution service instead of the URL itself. This external administrative component, maintained by OCLC, then finds and returns the URL associated with the PURL.'^ According to the PURL home page, 6460 PURL'S had been created as of June 16, 1996.

The final, and probably thorniest, maintenance concern that I will address is that of archiving. Who has the responsibility for maintaining the archives of an electronic title?

If the journal is freely available or our subscription t e r n permit, library staff can download and store the issues. I have already mentioned storage and staff time issues associated with doing this. The library is then depen- dent on potentially obsolete hardware and software to~provide access to the archive in the future.19 And just as our print and microform collections are subject to physical deterioration, there are preservation issues for elec- tronic media. As Neavill and Sheble point out, "Neither magnetic nor optical media are considered to be of archival quality. The lifetime of digital storage media is measured at best in decades. . . ."20

Some journals have backfiles available on diskette or microfiche. Post- modern Culture is one example. This is not, however, widely available.

Publishers can maintain archives for their publications. But there are potential problems here as well. Publishers can change. The direction of not-for-profit organizations can change. The editors and publishing responsibilities of smaller societies and professional organizations can change.2' The economics of electronic publishing are only now being determined, and I think a topic for future discussion will be what the incentive would be for publishers to maintain the archives.

Cooperative projec'is have been developed. The ClCNet consortium is a major one. What we are looking at when we access the CIC Electronic Journals Collection is an effort by and on behalf of the CIC member universities. While the collection is currently available to everyone, its

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ston

y B

rook

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

3:20

29

Oct

ober

201

4

146 PIONEERING NEW SERIALS FRONTIERS

maintenance takes an enormous amount of work and there is no guarantee that the CIC will be able to continue to orovide access to outside users.22 New partnerships are developing betwein publishers and libraries. In the case of the Scholarly Communications Project at Virginia Tech, the pub- lisher is the library; Project Muse is an example of an alliance between university presses and libraries.23

Neavill and Sheble present the possibility of libraries establishing coop- erative archiving on a national or international level, similar to the estab- lishment of bibliographic utilities for cooperative cataloging.24 They acknowledge that this is a concept for the future.

These archiving auestions are verv real. and their resolution is not at all < ,

clear. Likewise tLe kibliogtaphic questions and the staffing and training issues involved in providing access to and maintaining our collections. In the rapidly changi;lg environment of electronic resources, the questions may change before any answers are proposed. Despite the lack of answers, libraries have already embarked on the electronic path. In order to provide the best service not only to our users but to ourselves, we must do our best to manage our virtual as well as our literal collections. It is our responsibil- ity to nail that slippery Jell-0 to the wall.

I would like tp conclude this paper by resuming the quotation From Michael Gorman with which I began it:

Current attempts to control this chaos (Mosaic, the World Wide Web, etc.) are, when compared to the established structures of biblio- graphic control, inadequate. The alternatives are stark. We can either resign ourselves to terminal Information Anxiety or we can clean up the mess. Librarians . . . are uniquely qualified to tame the electronic wilderness-"If not us, who? If not now, when?"25

NOTES

I. Michael Gorman, "The Corruption of Cataloging," Library Journal 120, no. 15 (1 995). 34.

2. Martha Hruska, "Remote lnternet Serials in the OPAC?" Serials Review 2 1, no. 4 (1995). 68.

3. Eric Lease Morgan, "Adding lnternet Resources to our OPACS," Serials Review 2 1, no. 4 ( 1995), 70.

4. Allison Mook Sleeman, "Cataloging Remote Access Electronic Materi- als," Serials Review 21, no. 4 (1995). 72.

5. Wayne Jones, "We Need Those E-Serial Records," Serials Review 2 1 , no. 4 (1 995). 75.

6. Regina Reynolds, "Inventory List or Information Gateway? The Role of the Catalog in the Digital Age," Serials Review 21, no. 4 (1995). 76.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ston

y B

rook

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

3:20

29

Oct

ober

201

4

Concurrent Session 11: Order Out ofchaos

7. Hmska, 69. 8. Morgan, ibid. 9. Melissa Beck, Remote Access Computer File Serials. CONSER. URL:

http://lcweb.loc.gov/acq/wnser/module3 I .html. For background on the develop- ment of Module 31, see Bill Anderson and Les Hawkins, "Development of CONSER Cataloging Policies for Remote Access Computer File Serials," Ihe Atblic-Access Computer Systems Review 7, no. 1 (1996). URL: http:llinfo.lib. uh.edu/pr/v7/nl/ande7nl .html.

10. Nancy B. Olson, ed., Cataloging Internet Resoumes: A Manual and Prac- tical Guide. OCLC, 1995. URL: http://www.oclc.org/oclclman~92S6caUt0~.htm.

I I . Two examples are the University of Virginia Library's Cataloging Pmce- dures Manual (Computer Files Cataloging, Part D) (Online), 1994 (URL: http://www.lib.virginia.edu/catalo~ing/mxiidhtml) and Wei Zhang's and John ~losser ' i lnteractive EI&&C Serials ~ a t a l o ~ i n g Aid (IESCA) for ihe Northwestern University Libtaw (URL: httD://www.libra~.nwu.edu~iescal).

12. URL: hnp:llejo&als.ci~.nkt/index.html. 13. LJRL: http:/lwww.oclc.org:6990. 14. Morgan, 71. 15. Priscilla Caplan. "Controlling E-Journals: The lnternet Resources Project,

Cataloging Guidelines, and USMARC," 7he Serials Libranan 24, nos. 314 (1994). 105.

16. Morgan, "Description and Evaluation of the 'Mr. Serials' Process: Auto- matically Collecting, Organizing, Archiving, Indexing, and Disseminating Elec- tronic Serials," Serials Review 2 1, no. 4 (1 995): 1 - 12.

17. For background and description of lnternet resource naming standards see Caplan. "U-R-Stars: Standards for Controlling Internet Resources," rite Serials Librarian 28, nos. 314 (1996), 239-246; William Arms et al., "Uniform Resource Names: A Progress Report," D-Lib Magazine (February 1996) (URL: http:llwww. dlib.org/dlib/february96IO2anns.html); and LC's Network Development and MARC Standards Office's "Naming Conventions for Digital Resources" (URL: http:// Icweb.loc.gov/marc/naming.html).

18. URL: http:/lpurl.oclc.org. 19. Donnice Cochenour and Tom Moothart. "Relying on the Kindness of

Strangers: Archiving Electronic Journals on Gopher," Serials Review 21, no. 1 (1995),72; Gordon B. Neavill and Mary Ann Sheble, "Archiving Electronic Jour- nals," Serials Review 21, no. 4 (1995). 16.

20. Neavill and Sheble, IS. See also Maynard Brichford and William Maher. "Archival Issues in Network Electronic Publications," Library %rids 43, no. 4 (1995), 706.

21. Cochenour and Moothart, 72-73. 22. Cochenour and Moothart, 72. 23. Cochenour and Moothart, 73. 24. Neavill and Sheble, 19. 25. Gorman. ibid.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ston

y B

rook

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

3:20

29

Oct

ober

201

4