You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 5 Next »

Contacts

 - All contacts will be entered in the CE, then shared with both local RMs

 - Staff will inherit relevant contacts from the CE and attach to providers and databases as appropriate

Naming conventions

For Contact name when it is a generic Tech Support type of contact:

Last Name = Technical Support, Customer Support, etc... (i.e. Support)

First Name = Vendor name (i.e. Alexander Street Press)

For Contact Type menu:

Columbia - Vendor                         

Consortia                            

Columbia - Selector                        

Other                   

Columbia - Staff                               

Cornell - Vendor                              

2CUL - Vendor                  

Cornell - Staff                   

2CUL - Staff

Trial phase

  • Enter Cornell's Innovative ERM contacts into CE following this process.
  • Evaluate pros/cons

Licenses

 - Precise terminology, naming conventions, etc... to be determined by Phase II license entry planning group

Workflow

  •  All Licenses will be input at CE (with the exception of Cornell’s Phase 1 work). 
  • These will be shared to both CULs, and inherited as needed. 
  • These CE versions will be copied in the local RM (essentially working like a template), edited for local information (scanned license URL, Auth Users, other exceptions)
  • The local copy will be attached to appropriate resources. 
    • Assumption: We will always need to copy the CE version of the license in the local RMs as we will have some local data to encode (Auth users, etc...)

Trial of workflow

We will choose several licenses (perhaps NERL licenses) to start the process.  Phase II license group should suggest a group of licenses.

 

Databases

Workflow trial possibility:  Choose one of the large publishers (Elsevier, Wiley, Springer) to work through and develop a process.  Each of these publishers introduces a host of variables to sort out in our work; including usubscribed title lists; many titles in common; many titles not in common; journals, books, and other content.  Perhaps collection development can suggest one to start with, or look at renewal cycles.  Springer Journals is up for renewal this year, Wiley and Elsevier are both recently renewed via NERL (2 years and 5 years, respectively).

  • No labels