...
| Page Properties | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
...
Bibliographic records can be migrated but there is no mandate
Holdings records should not be suppressed
Item record must be placed in a location governed by a fulfillment unit that prevents loan, digitization, and physical copy requests of the items.
Location codes should indicate that the the item is at an RLF and ideally be coded only as either “NRLF” or “SRLF”
Considerations:
Campuses should consider whether to remove holdings in OCLC for RLF bibliographic records not migrated to Alma. Both SRLF and NRLF set their own OCLC holdings for deposited items.
Reasoning
This decision combines recommendations from two Test Load decisions listed below in “background.” Holdings and item records for general collections resources should comply with the recommendation from Fulfillment in full while a small exception is made for Special Collections holdings records. In both cases, bibliographic records can be migrated.
...
(Test load) Local RLF bibliographic record migration
Records Retained for Items Deposited in RLFs
Dependencies
The PPC decision will need to incorporate input from the RLF Task Force
...
Questions to consider
Impacts on fulfillment: Records Retained for Items Deposited in RLFs
Action Log
Action/Point Person | Expected Completion Date | Notes | Status |
|---|---|---|---|