Record updated by user BATCH-UPD on (yyyy/mo/da)...

This may explain some problems with "saving-to-server" when staff do so frequently while working on one record.

Question posted to OLIS_Service Support Desk ( olis_help@itec.suny.edu )

After deleting STA=OCLC to remove suppression, we attempt to save on server, and get this message:

! Record updated by user BATCH-UPD on (yyyy/mo/da) , (00:00)

We find that when unsuppressing 20 books, perhaps half will have this message. Can you explain why this inconsistency occurs?

Another message received inconsistently while removing suppression:

Record was updated in the server. Continue loading? Y or N

Our question is continue loading what? What is the proper response to this question?

Response to question by Maggie Horn

This is now happening because we have invoked the table changes necessary for the union catalog updates.
You should work on your bibliographic record LAST in the series of working on holdings and/or items.
By working on the bibliographic record "LAST", I mean that you should NOT pull your bib record into the editing window in cataloging until after you are done with item/holdings update. (when you update an item or a holdings record, the 005 on the cataloging record is being updated behind the scenes -- therefore you get that message).

So:

1. retrieve the record you want to work on through the find tab in cataloging.
2. click on overview.
3. push to items.
4. then click on overview.
5. highlight the HOL record (if you need to work on that), push to cataloging (this will open up the HOL record).
6. THEN double-click on the BIB record to pull it in.

alternate 4-6

4. click on overview.

5. highight the bib record.

6. push to cataloging.

All who have joined are administrators of this blog

Everyone who's accepted the invitation has been made an administrator.

That way, if anyone else needs to be invited, or other changes made, it doesn't have to go through one person.

If you want to invite other trainers (keep it lean) you have the authority.

Click on Get your own Blog to login and be able to access this blogs control panel.

If you have questions, let me know.

Monographic Order question

Have we decided if we'll have access to the Initiator ID (which comes from the circulation information?

Access would make Hold/Notify Easier and somewhat more automated using Aleph features.

How does Binghamton handle it, out of curiousity?

Acquisitions brief record template

Regarding brief record "quick cataloging" template.

If you go to the Acq module and click the "orders" menu pulll-down, you then click on "catalog order".

This brings up a window that is a template for a brief record. It's inadequate, in my opinion. There should be a 245 b field; a 260 b field; and an 856 field for electronic resources.

It's unlikely to be used in the ordering process, so I'm not going to investigate this furthur.

Subfield h display problem

In the 245 OPAC display (client & browser) the GMD subfield is not displaying in the correct order. Because this relates to the h subfield, the problem doesn't apply to print books, journals, etc.

My assumption is this would mean a table setting tweak.