RE: Millennium Headings Reports: questions

["David Ruml" <David dot Ruml at cityofcarrollton dot com>]

We generally accumulate a large number of "headings used for the first time", but we don't have the staff to look into it, so I just ditch that part of the report without worrying about it.  It hasn't caused any problems for us, to my knowledge.  I think that report is just an alert that says "Hey, these are first-time use...do you want to create an authority record for them?" (since Innovative doesn't require the presence of authority records).

DAVID E. RUML
Bibliographic Database and Systems Admin.
Carrollton Public Library at Hebron & Josey
4220 N. Josey Lane
CARROLLTON, TEXAS  75010

david dot ruml at cityofcarrollton dot com
http://www.cityofcarrollton.com/library


-----Original Message-----
From: innopac-bounces at innopacusers dot org
[mailto:innopac-bounces at innopacusers dot org]On Behalf Of Gale E. Eckerson
Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2005 1:24 PM
To: innopac at innopacusers dot org
Subject: Millennium Headings Reports: questions


Dear Colleagues:

Thanks to all who answered my last question on the speed or lack 
thereof in Mil Headings Reports. Innovative does have a fix for 
the slowness (which we will install here after we upgrade our 
memory), so those of you who reported that yours was as slow as 
mine will want to contact the III Helpdesk for relief.

Now for another question: In the words of so many who post 
questions here, AM I MISSING SOMETHING? Case in point, "Headings 
Used for the First Time." No matter how often I run this report, 
the list is very, very long. Today, 4800+ entries. I don't want 
to waste the paper to print this, so I just scroll through to 
find obvious conflicts with existing "followed by" or "preceded 
by" headings. This morning I browsed the "A" portion of the 
alphabet and screen printed about 7 problems. 

Now, when I want to close the list, I would like to clear the 
200+ headings that started with "A." However, what should be 
simple, that is, checking off the first box, then scrolling to 
number 200, holding down the shift key, and checking that box, 
does not have the effect that works everywhere else in Windows. 
I would expect all the little boxes to get check marks, but they 
don't. All the big boxes turn blue, but only # 1 and # 200 have 
check marks. What happens then is that only two of the 200 I 
have reviewed are cleared.

I am not ready to check each of 200, or 4800, boxes 
individually. Was this an oversight on Innovative's part, or is 
there some reason that makes sense that you are forced to check 
each box individually?

Another point, is any other institution with a high volume of 
"headings used for the first time" just skipping a review of 
those headings? If so, may I take it that there is no 
measurable, significant impact on the quality of your database? 
Given the way the function works, just for this very large 
segment of my headings reports, I am tempted just not to bother 
to look at them at all.

Thanks for your help and wisdom!

Gale Eckerson

************************************************
Gale E. Eckerson
Manager, Library Applications
C/W MARS Inc.
1 Sunset Lane
Paxton, MA 01612
(508) 755-3323 ext. 27
(508) 755-3721 (FAX)
e-mail: geckerso at cwmars dot org
****************************************************
The hurrieder I go, the behinder I get!


--
This message was distributed through the Innovative Users Group INNOPAC list
Public replies:  INNOPAC at innopacusers dot org
Update your subscription options: http://innopacusers.org/mailman/listinfo/innopac