Include rolling dates in local date information field
As an electronic resource librarian, I would like to see a better way to deal with rolling coverage dates. There does not seem to be a good way to deal with gaps in portfolio coverage when there's a moving target date involved. For example, if a title includes perpetual access from 2011-present, and issues 12 years or older are open access, unless you include a public note, what will display is:
Available from 2011 volume: xx issue: xx
Most recent 12 year(s) not available
This is confusing to patrons and librarians alike. It would be useful to have the option to select a rolling date within the "local date information" field, instead of having a separate field that displays rolling date information in a different manner than other coverage information. For example, with the proposed enhancement, you could have date coverage:
Available from 1923 volume: xx issue: xx to 2005 volume: xx issue: xx (or even "issues older than 12 years")
From 2011 volume: xx issue: xx
Jen Montavon-Green
shared this idea
-
Jaymie Turner
commented
I've just run into this same problem. We have an OA title that is available with a 5-year rolling window but also a 12-month embargo. We were going to add a public note, select local coverage and leave that date blank, but it also seems to default to global, even if local is selected if there is no coverage information included.
-
Verity Allison
commented
As an e-resources librarian too, I agree and would also like to have the ability to enter both a local embargo and a local rolling year, at the moment it appears to be either or but we have a resource with the following policy: Journal content is now freely available for 5 years beginning 12 months after publication.
-
Nikki DeMoville
commented
I literally stole a vote from something else to vote for this. Why? Taylor & Francis and their recent change from "access back to 1997" to "20 year rolling backfile." The current system works acceptably for simple current subscriptions, but it's very confusing for closed titles (canceled, ceased, title changes).
e.g. we have a title that has rolling 20 year backfile access + ceased in 2012. What our users now see is
Available until 2012 volume: 46 issue: 1
Most recent 20 year(s) availableClearly both statements in the above cannot be true.
I'd like to add on to Jen's idea by asking that the statement not only be combined with other local coverage but also that the wording be made both simpler and more context specific: "Available from xx year(s) ago to ..." when local holdings have an end date, and "... to xx year(s) ago" when local holdings have a start date.
Ideally, in my example, I'd like to see
Available from 20 year(s) ago until 2012 volume: 46 issue: 1Jen's example would look like this:
Available from 1923 to 12 year(s) ago