Split coverage

Do you have any online journals with a year or two missing from the subscription? We do, and unfortunately it makes our holdings look inaccurate. The record may say “2000 to present” when we’re missing the 2005 issues.

We get our MARC records from EBSCO, and their managed coverage doesn’t yet support split coverage. In November, an EBSCO rep informed me that

The split coverage will not work with LinkSource if used in the custom coverage field. We are still testing to see how the split coverage affects LinkSource when used as managed coverage but essentially LinkSource uses additional information to obtain the correct managed coverage. This process is not applied to the custom coverage. We will be looking at ways to allow for this in the future. Of course this format could be used for custom coverage but it would cause LinkSource not to report the correct coverage.

You can see an example of the split managed coverage they’re testing by looking at the record for Oral Tradition (1986 – 1986, 2003 to present).

I could force non-EJS records into reading “2000-2004, 2006 to present” by entering:

Custom Coverage Begin: 2000-2004, 2006
End: [blank]

But that affects LinkSource.

Of course, I can’t fool EJS records into being accurate because our system is set up to receive updates and the custom coverage won’t stick for EJS titles. What I can do is add an “End User Access Note”. And I have. I’ve added a note to several titles that says “YYYY issues available on Publisher’s Site”.

The catalog and A-to-Z list are still inaccurate, but the message gets across. I look forward to seeing split coverage in a future enhancement to match our standard practices for recording serials holdings.

Advertisements
Posted in EBSCO, MARC. Comments Off on Split coverage
%d bloggers like this: