...
Cornell Database Names - Responsible parties - Discovery & Access Team (interface design and implementation), E-Resource Staff (Record management and license entry). The D&A team was preparing to investigate these alternatives as part of their project.
- 948 field: webfeatdb indicates that it is part of the list curated by the Database Review Committee
- 653 subject fields used to facilitate browsability by curated subjects.
- Various other subject, alternate titles, and description fields used for broader searching capabilities
- License terms to be held in RM, linked to from appropriate records.using License Data API
...
Batch Loading - Responsible parties - Pete Hoyt, Chris Manly, Gary Branch, Heather Shipman, Jesse Koennecke - This group will address any issues that arise related to batch loads between Serials Solutions, Voyager, and the Innovative ERM. We expect the required changes to be minimal although there may be potential to overhaul the processes more thoroughly in the future. Time Estimate: 10-20 hours from CUL IT and Batch processing staff
Consortial System Implementation - The specific details are still being worked out. The current plan is to replicate Columbia's Resource Manager data to populate the Consortial layer's "parent" 2CUL database, then linking that to the two "child" databases for Cornell and Columbia. Many resources will match up relatively easily after this first pass as the 2CUL partners have significant overlap in collections. We will identify project work to match other resources as appropriate. This may be a great area for Columbia's proposed staff member to work on. Time Estimate: 40 hours testing across e-resources staff. This is expected to continue to take some time from existing e-resource staff as we ideinfy and implement best practices.
To be tested:To be tested (can we test the sandbox over a relatively short period? 2 weeks?):
- How do we handle resources where we get records from other third parties? I.E. MARCIVE, OCLC, Vendors?
- Does Columbia data as "parent" help or hinder?
- Workflow - what goes in CE layer, what goes in local? Are there one or more clear scenarios for this?
Data entry and matching collections - These aspects of migration from Innovative to RM, and connecting Cornell and Columbia's RM collections to the parent RM-CE records to be the most labor intensive aspects of implementation. Most of this work can be accomplished by e-resource staff. The goal is to sync as much as possible between the 2CUL collections records. The following staff will be essential for making this work smoothly and quicklymaking this work smoothly and quickly (Time Estimate: 150+ hours during implementation from Columbia staff member and/or existing e-resources staff to match data records across collections and migrate information from Innovative ERM system) :
- Columbia position - Columbia has offered to contribute the services of a full-time staff position to assist Cornell in making the transition to RM. This position will assist in the move to the Consortial version of RM as well. The position is at the same level as the current staff in Electronic Resources at Columbia.
- Various other E-Resources staff - All of Cornell's E-Resources Unit staff are prepared to spend time in the coming months. They are eager to see this work well and the process of updating data will give them valuable experience using all of the systems. Columbia's E-resources staff will help guide the process with their experience in the systems and well also concentrate on ensuring that Columbia's records match properly in the RM-CE.
License Record Entry - Cornell staff will need to enter license data to match at least what is currently entered in the Innovative system. Some of this will be able to be migrated, but there will also be some manual entry and updating required. Time Estimate: 25-40 hours from e-resources staff during implementation to match current level of completion.
Batch loading cost data - This is not necessary during implementation, but should be started as early as possible to have resource cost data included in the system. This data can then be examined across 2CUL collections and utilized by the 360 COUNTER Service to estimate cost-per-use. Time Estimate: 20-30 hours from e-resources and batch loading staff to investigate and develop workflow.