Hello,
I have attached a more formal specification for the changes we are
proposing for Millennium ILL to support the ARTEmail request format
better. I hope I have included everyone's suggestions adequately. Even
with six extra fields it is a struggle to get everything which people
might reasonably need catered for. Three of the fields have to be
devoted to bibliographic purposes (indeed, for conference proceedings we
actually need four new fields but I have fudged it). This leaves only
three extra fields for internal purposes, and there we have the
difficulty of accommodating different use cases, for fields present on
the form and sent to suppliers (the current Q5a to Q5c serve this need)
through to fields which do not appear on the form and are not sent to
suppliers, with the other two combinations of fields which are on the
form and not passed to suppliers and fields which are not on the form
but are passed to suppliers. Assuming these possibilities can be
supported, that only leaves one of each type!
At the end is a section of issues still to resolve. While this is
mainly for Innovative to answer, I would appreciate any comments.
I will send this on to Innovative later this afternoon, assuming I do
not spot any more issues in the meantime.
Interestingly, on Friday I received the first draft of the BL's proposed
API, so I was able to feed in some information from that. I think I
have to get my response to that process back in the next couple of
weeks. I thought I might have a rest from ILL now, but clearly I was
wrong!
Matthew
--
Matthew Phillips
Electronic Systems Librarian, Durham University
Durham University Library, Stockton Road, Durham, DH1 3LY
+44 (0)191 334 2941
|