vendor records: a brief survey 2007 oclc cjk users group meeting karen t. wei university of illinois...
TRANSCRIPT
Vendor Records: A Brief Survey
2007 OCLC CJK Users Group Meeting
Karen T. WeiUniversity of Illinois
March 24, 2007
The Survey
Purposes: Originally, to collect vendor records information for UIUC purposes (we are exploring vendor records in all languages); to share findings with the Users Group
Survey sent out electronically in January 2007 with follow-up as late as early March
Total survey sent: 43 Total survey received back: 38 Return rate: 88%
Does your East Asian Library use vendors records for: 38
Acquisitions only: 7 Cataloging only: 2 Acquisitions/Cataloging: 2 Neither: 27 29% uses vendor records 71% does not use vendor records
Do you use vendor records for: 11
Chinese: Acquisitions: 7 Cataloging: 2 Japanese: Acquisitions: 4 Cataloging: 3 Korean: Acquisitions: 1 Cataloging: 0
If you use Chinese vendors, whose records do you use?
CIBTC: Acquisitions: 6 Cataloging: 2 CNPITC: Acquisitions: 6 Cataloging: 2 Shanghai Library: Cataloging (CJCAT): 1
5 libraries use both for acquisitions
If you use Japanese vendors, whose records do you use?
Kinokunya: Acquisitions: 2 Cataloging: 3 TRC from RLG: Acquisitions: 2 Issedo, Gannando, JPTC: Acquisitions: 1
If you use Korean vendors, whose records do you use?
Panmun: Acquisitions: 1 Eulyoo – One library is providing
them with training so that they can send brief records in the future
Are there fees involved for acquisitions records in:
Chinese: Yes: 1 No: 6 Japanese: Yes: 2 No: 2 Korean: No: 1
Are there fees involved for cataloging records in:
Chinese: Yes: 2 No: 0 Japanese: Yes: 3 No: 0
Are you satisfied with the quality of the acquisitions
records in:
Chinese: Yes: 7 Note: so far Japanese: Yes: 4 Korean: Yes: 1
Are you satisfied with the quality of the cataloging records in:
Chinese: Yes: 2 Note: Each vendor is different; some are satisfactory,
some require checking for authority work; with modifications and localization by both the Chinese librarian and cataloger
Japanese: Yes: 3 Note: Mostly ok; some minor problems with subject
headings; but no authority work is contributed
Have you experienced any problems in loading vendor
records into your local system?
No problems: 5 Note: loading one record one at a time; can
revise some minor problems
Yes: 5 Note: initially; lots of problems but solved and
settled at long last; only in the beginning stage; it is also possible when there is a shift in staff; correct some typos; record transferring
What is your local system?
Voyager: 12 III: 10 Ex Libris: 7 Sirsi: 6 Aleph: 1 Horizon: 1 Gladis: 1
If you are not currently using vendor records, how likely are you in using them
in the near future? Highly likely: 6 Likely: 4 Not Likely: 8 Don’t know: 7 Did not answer: 2
Reasons for not considering the vendor records (1)
Quality control: concerned about quality of subject headings and classifications
Compatibility with local systems: Need efforts/times to resolve issues between US, China, Japan, and Korea; complication in loading
Workflow issues: if vendor records are not received in time that will affect our workflow; need to review workflow in addition to solving the technical difficulties; concern on limitation on records supply
Systems priorities; need their assistance to test and/or implement vendor records
Reasons for not considering the vendor records (2)
May not be cost-effective Not satisfied with Chinese test records Smaller collection; no need for vendor records Have trained cataloging staff in house Can’t create order records in RLIN anymore
and OCLC does not allow acquisitions records Our library’s system does not support CJK
input or display Already outsourced to OCLC Have not had discussion Decision made by Library administration
Comments/Experiences to share (1)
Takes resolve/time to fine-tune the download and merging of records though it is cost-effective in the long run
Even if libraries chose to use vendor records, they still need professionals to oversee the project and perform quality maintenance
Received excellent initial bibliographic records from CNPITC
Not too strict on acquisitions records as they will be replaced eventually; for cataloging records vendors need to follow AACR2r rules
Vendor records are great service; save time and quality is better than the ones that our students create
Would love to hear from other libraries experience
Comments/Experiences to share (2)
Will have vendor records for Chinese e-books Successfully test-loaded vendor records from
CIBTC and Beijing Guotu into Voyager May look at Japanese vendor records as more
Japanese books have only provisional records from Waseda University or no records at all
May outsource CJK acquisitions/cataloging because of shortage of quality CJK librarians
Doubt the quality of vendor records first; short acquisitions records may be acceptable; if vendors do not produce fast enough it will affect workflow
Thank You!
Special Thanks To:
Arizona; ASU; Brown; Chicago; Columbia; Cornell; Duke; Emory; Florida; Harvard; Hawaii; Illinois; Indiana; Iowa, Kansas; LC; Michigan; Minnesota; North Carolina; Oregon; Ohio State; Penn State; Pittsburgh; Princeton; Stanford; Texas; UBC; UC-Berkeley; UC-Davis; UCLA; UC-Riverside; UCSB; UCSD; USC; Virginia; Washington U at St. Louis; Wisconsin; Yale