Re: III 3000 Item record limit

[BRIAN D STRIMAN <bstriman@xxxxxxxxxx>]

The best solution is for Innovative Interfaces Inc. to change their
software to accomodate the item record limit.  This was brought up years
ago, as we at the U. of Nebraska-Lincoln had this problem and had to fudge
our records to accomodate the system's software limitation. The
programmers would have to come up with some "innovative" software design
that would recognize when the item limit was approaching any particular
bib record, then could jump that record link over to the special software
which would handle the over-3,000 limit for those few records where the
situation is present. 

To me, this shouldn't be an "enhancement"-- this should be a MUST HAVE.
It'd be like buying a Porsche, but where the car's engineers designed
the engine to only rev up to 1,000 rpm.

Ah me. It reminds me of the WebPac, where the Pub Notes data in the item
records doesn't display, but use to when we had the telnet OPAC display.
What happened? Why was this feature "dropped?"

--Brian Striman
  U. of Neb. --Schmid Law Library



On Thu, 13 Jan 2000, Stephen Slovasky wrote:

> Hi Jim, 
> 
> At the Connecticut State Library, we ran into the 3000 item limit with the Hartford Courant (our local newspaper) bib record.  We created a brief bib record and suppressed it and attached the item records for earlier years to it.  The checkin records are all attached to the complete bib record, which is the only one the public sees.  So far this has not been a problem:  users find their way to the correct microfilm cabinets after they discover the call number (we classify our newspaper microfilm) in the checkin record.
> 
> Since the Courant is a heavily used title, I've made sure that our reference and circulation staff understand this unusual situation.  They have the Innopac number for the brief bib and they know to consult it if a patron finds a reel or reels unavailable in the cabinet (we ILL our newspaper microfilm, and it gets a lot of in-house use, so there are often gaps).
> 
> Not an ideal solution, but it works for this particular title in this particular library.
> 
>  
> 
> Stephen Slovasky
> Unit Head
> Bibliographic Information Services
> 
> CONNECTICUT STATE LIBRARY
> 231 Capitol Avenue
> Hartford, CT  06106
> 
> sslovasky@xxxxxxxxxx
> Voice:  860/566 2827
> Fax:     866/566 3991
> 
> 
> 
> >>> Jim Barrett <jbarrett@xxxxxxxxxx> 01/12/00 10:55AM >>>
> Hi Everyone,
> 
> I have a question regarding the item record limit. I searched the
> archives and found a lot of queries but only a few solutions.  I was
> wondering if anyone had come up with a new solution to this problem.
> 
> The best solution for my library seems to be to create a duplicate bib
> record and bracket the volume coverage in each record. Is this still
> considered the best solution? Or has someone come up with a more creative
> way to handle it?
> 
> Thanks, 
> Jim 
> ----
> Jim Barrett : jbarrett@xxxxxxxxxx : (617) 573-8592
> Suffolk University Law School Library, Boston, Mass. USA
> 
> 
> 

-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Brian D. Striman			| Professor of Law Library
University of Nebraska-Lincoln		| Head of Technical Services &
College of Law				| Catalog Librarian
Schmid Law Library 			| Phone: 402-472-8286
P.O. Box 830902				| Fax:   402-472-8260
Lincoln NE  68583-0902			| E-mail: bstriman@xxxxxxxxxx
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~