1 / 10

G roup A feedback

G roup A feedback. Copac Collection Management Tools Project Workshop on Retention and Preservation, March 12 th 2012 . 1. Initial thoughts. Would identifying uniques prevent ILL? – i.e. No willingness to lend as it is so unique Task may not be feasible on an item-by-item basis

amy
Download Presentation

G roup A feedback

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Group A feedback Copac Collection Management Tools Project Workshop on Retention and Preservation, March 12th 2012

  2. 1. Initial thoughts • Would identifying uniques prevent ILL? – i.e. No willingness to lend as it is so unique • Task may not be feasible on an item-by-item basis • Need agreed standards BUT is difficult to do the necessary work retrospectively • Can be done on unique collections but not across the entire collection • Willingness to make available to other institutions to digitise – needs collective agreement

  3. Initial thoughts • Including info in records: Could be done across collections, but item-by-item would be ad hoc & then flagged. • Could batch add preservation status across collections. • Common semantics. • Level of confidence in knowing physical state of “last copies”.

  4. Initial thoughts • “8 copies”; UKRR “3” • UK register of digital masters • Disciplinary views on digital resources & relative importance of print collections • Just because something is old does not mean that it is worth saving • Support for digitisation/digital preservation

  5. Initial thoughts • Also issues of digital preservation & cost (life cycle, byte preservation) • Is copac data granular enough to identify item differences? • Item level information • What preservation has been done locally? (Not on list). Where to keep this info (e.g. intention to preserve)

  6. 2. Priorities • 1. Intention to retain long-term • 2. Condition • 3. ILL status • 3. Digitisation • 5. Common semantics

  7. 2. • Can copac be mined already – based on current data? • Recording information within metadata • Agreement where the data needs to be recorded (which type of record, where in record) needed. • REF, research excellence, print collection being the only unique collection • Identifying areas of need & appending this against records

  8. 3. Holdings • 8 copies/institutions – where they are located – geography influences decisions (e.g. for types of users who do not have rights to ILL service) • Groups/consortia/specialsims., esp with regional funding (e.g. regional governments) • National & regional agreements about no. of copies to retain • Uncatalogued materials – pre-1800. But these are not the materials that need the most attention in terms of space • Define terminology in advance for pre-1800 materials

  9. 4. Collection strengths • Choosing to not collect: To some extent already making these decisons - relation to current teaching & research • Mapping at collection level where the strengths are for subjects/disciplines. • Institutional problems/politics of disposal of stock. • How do you advertise the wish to get rid of collections to other libraries? Benefits of “small adds” – i.e looking for a good home. • Need strategic view. • Transfer is low down in list of priorities

  10. 5. Copac tools • What is not (currently) in copac. But start from what we already have. • Time-limited flag against materials for keeping and/or disposing/passing to another institution. • Use copac to mark items that there is an intention to dispose of something – then can be used by other institutions. • Designation scheme – can feed into this. Unique & special collections.

More Related