What we really need here is Arbitrary Biblio Relationships, so we can have these distinct biblios broken down by item type (or, rather GMD), but also have a 'higher level' biblio that patrons can place holds upon if they don't care about the format. I've got this all spec'ed out, I just need some time and funding to make it happen.<br>
<br>Cheers,<br><br><br>-Ian<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 8:42 AM, Nicole Engard <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:nengard@gmail.com">nengard@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="im">On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 8:38 AM, <<a href="mailto:hansbkk@gmail.com">hansbkk@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> OK, so far so good. However I didn't realize there was such a thing as<br>
> a "Biblio-level" hold, and in my case I can't imagine it would be much<br>
> use, since most patrons wouldn't want "whatever item type of this<br>
> biblio is returned next", only a specific item type.<br>
<br>
</div>Traditional cataloging rules state that you shouldn't be attaching<br>
multiple item types to one bib record, so if you have multiple copies<br>
of the book those should be on one bib record and if you have an audio<br>
book that should be a different record. Not all libraries follow that<br>
rule, but if that rule is followed then yes patrons would just want<br>
the next copy of the item returned, not a specific item.<br>
<br>
Thanks<br>
Nicole C. Engard<br>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Ian Walls<br>Lead Development Specialist<br>ByWater Solutions<br>Phone # (888) 900-8944<br><a href="http://bywatersolutions.com">http://bywatersolutions.com</a><br><a href="mailto:ian.walls@bywatersolutions.com">ian.walls@bywatersolutions.com</a><br>
Twitter: @sekjal<br>