Collaborative Collections - Index 583 more fully
Collaborative collecting agreements are becoming increasingly critical for libraries in managing collections and access across institutions. Formal agreements require libraries to update records with an appropriate Action Note (583 field) to note these commitments. Currently, only $a of the action note is indexed. All fields of the 583 (when present in bibs or holdings) should be indexed, or at a minimum $c, $d, $f and $5.
-
Lynne Billington commented
Agreed that it should be combined and agreed that the 583 in the bib record should be searchable. I can find it in Primo but not in Alma.
-
Lynne Billington commented
I just went to search for this content today and an all keywords search wouldn't find it in Alma.
-
Paula Coulthard commented
Can this be combined with
Collaborative Collections - Index 583 more fully
(which currently has more votes)
? -
Paula Coulthard commented
It is important to note that the 583 subfield a is currently indexed only in the Holdings record, NOT indexed at all in the bibliographic record (that is where our library is inputting the note as we migrated from another system in 2016 and the note was populated in the bib, not the holdings record).
I will vote for this, but overall, I would like to see indexing of all the note fields in the bibliographic record also (I suppose that is a different Idea Exchange item.!) -
David Schuster commented
In Network Zone's this doesn't work. There is another Collaborative Collections request to put something in the item fields which would be report able, but also keep you from deleting it.
-
Kelly Bliss commented
The bib 583 note is not index and therefore is not searchable in Alma unless we copy the field to a 9XX field. Please either add it to the general Notes search index or create is own Action note index.