Minutes

ERM Implementation Team

8-1-2005, 8-4 revision

 

Present:  Culshaw, Fong, Jobe, Wicht

 

  • Fong and Jobe reported that they augmented test records for Science, Project Muse, and Reference USA, and added a new record for Historical Abstracts.  Would like to be able to add local subject headings.  Culshaw has a several calls out to Innovative, including a call about creating multi-value, variable length fields—the feature that would enable us to add local subject headings.
  • Culshaw also reported that the system has been having problems with locked records.
  • Prior to the meeting Wicht entered some test contact records. 
  • After reviewing the test records, the committee made the following tentative decisions:

o       Create one contact record rather than one for sales and one for technical support.

o       Use Note1 and Note 2 for information about sales and technical contacts.  Although it’s possible to add multiple contact names, phone numbers, and e-mails, the entries don’t stay together after the record has been saved.  E.g. all the names are together, all the phone numbers together, etc.  In order to keep the entries together, the committee decided to use Note 1 for the primary contact, Note 2 for other contacts. Information contained in the notes fields is indexed by keyword in ERM.  So for example, if you search a sales contact’s name in keyword mode, appropriate records appear in the list of results. Note format would be as follows:

Name, Role (sales, technical, etc.), Phone number or an extension number of the main number, and E-mail.  (The 99 character limit should be able to accommodate all of this information.)

 

o       Use Special for Revision History.  Culshaw will rename.

o       Culshaw will create a template for contact records that will include:

§         Code

§         Name

§         Role

§         Primary Address

§         Phone

§         Fax

§         E-mail

§         URL

§         Primary Contact (renamed from Note 1)

§         Other Contacts (renamed from Note 2)

§         Revision History (renamed from Special)

 

  • Wicht agreed to create about 10 records after Culshaw builds the template. The committee suggested that Wicht should create contact records for BCR, GWLA, and the products for which we have test resource records in order to test linking between resource records and contact records.
  • The committee will try to develop a naming convention for the codes after Wicht completes her preliminary work.  Wicht is hoping that the codes are intuitive.
  • Wicht agreed to search the ERM discussion list archive to make sure that the committee’s understanding of the issues associated with multiple records is correct.  In a follow-up e-mail she commented:

I wanted to search the ERM listserv archive to see what the thread about multiple contact records for a single access provider was all about, and how other libraries dealt with that issue.  During our meeting we basically decided to stick with one contact record per access provider, but I still wanted to read through that thread just to see what ideas/thoughts came up.

  • Culshaw agreed to contact Innovative about Note1 and URL.  Currently they don’t appear in the list of variable fields for contact records. These fields appear to be restricted to managers.  In a follow-up e-mail he noted:

We never talked about this call...  But in preparing to open the call to 'add' the n and y fields to contact records, I noticed that they are on this list.  Do you see any reason to restrict these to 'managers' or shall I ask that these be opened up?

 

For the time being, I've given Heather function 202 and updated the template so that she can start working on contact records.  I have also changed the variable length field labels to reflect the new long names we decided up on today.