Hello,

I've been a bit busy since the useful discussion of ILL issues at the
EIUG Conference in Leeds. Eric Leckbee has been in touch so I need to
draw up a proposal for an arrangement of fields that would suit us all,
which is likely to include some additional fields to deal with our
concerns.

Before I do that, I just want to clear out of the way two other issues.
One was the strange behaviour of two of the fields in certain
circumstances (Q4, field code h, being blanked if we try to acquire from
a source other than the BL; Q3e, field code g, being set to zero when
receiving a non-returnable item). Betsy felt sure these were bugs which
they could fix.

The other was the handling of stuff ordered via Secure Electronic
Delivery from the BL. There are two options here, to have the material
delivered direct to the user's own e-mail address, or to have the
material delivered to the library. In the latter case the request is
handled like any other, being moved to "Pending" once it is ordered.
But in the former case, the request is moved straight to "Filled" which
makes it harder to re-order from another supplier and harder to chase if
the BL lose it. (We were told, years ago, that it was implemented like
this because Innovative thought library staff would have no way of
tracking whether the order had been filled, but of course the BL sends
us an e-mail also when the item is supplied.)

Betsy seemed happy to look at changing the SED behaviour so that all SED
requests move to Pending, rather than the direct-to-user requests moving
straight to Filled as at present.

Could any Millennium site which would not be happy with this change
please let me know as soon as possible, preferably with reasons so that
we can understand the needs better!

Thanks!

I will now get back to the field definitions....

Matthew

--
Matthew Phillips
Electronic Systems Librarian, Durham University
Durham University Library, Stockton Road, Durham, DH1 3LY
+44 (0)191 334 2941