Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Thu, 30 Jul 1992 08:45:48 CST
From:         "Pat Ramage" <URAMAGE@USOUTHAL.BITNET>
Subject:      Recall/Hold enhancements
Comments: To: circ1@maillist.BITNET, notcirc1@maillist.BITNET,
              NOTIS/DOBIS discussion group list <NOTIS-L@TCSVM.BITNET>

Here is another document from the Circ SIG 5.2 Rewrite Committee.
As before, comments to Bruce Hulse, HULSE@WRLCVM; Tom Schneiter,
SCHNEITE@IUBACS; or Ed Moeller, 70523.250@compuserve.com.

This document was prepared by Ed Moeller, who sent it and the next
to me on a diskette as an ASCII file, then loaded as a file on
CMS.  The others were sent to me as email, or as ASCII files over
Internet...if you were wondering how we worked this out.

Here's my usual apology to those of you who receive duplicate
messages...take heart, only one more after this one.

Pat Ramage
Chair, NOTIS Circ SIG
Systems Librarian/LIB1
University of South Alabama Libraries
Mobile, AL 36688
205-460-7021



                           Recall/Hold Enhancements.


                               Printed Products

Statement:        Provide more flexibility in printed products.
                  Allow for the messages on recall and item
                  available notices to differ from the messages on
                  overdue notices and fines bills.  Provide for the
                  printing of patron's phone number on both the hold
                  slip and item available notice.  Allow for
                  suppression of printing of item available notices
                  for institutions which call patrons.  Allow for
                  2nd recall notice to be sent.  This would be table
                  driven just as overdue notices are.  Allow option
                  to print item-not-available notice when item with
                  recall or hold goes lost/missing (billed, patron-
                  claims-returned).  If table option is chosen, at a
                  number of days after the item becomes lost/missing
                  all requests would be removed from the queue, and
                  an item-not-available notice would be generated
                  for each patron whose not-needed-after date has
                  not expired.

Rationale:        Since the same message appears on overdue, item
                  needed, and item available notices and fines
                  bills, the text of the message must be so general
                  as to be almost useless.  Phone numbers are
                  desirable for those institutions which do not wish
                  to rely on the mail.  Some patrons need to be told
                  to return recalled items more than once.  LMS
                  currently has no mechanism for notifying staff or
                  patrons when an item with recalls or holds is
                  charged to lost or missing.  Patrons who expect to
                  receive an item could remain in the queue
                  indefinitely.

                            Removing Recalls/Holds

Statement:        Clean up processing for removed and canceled
                  recalls/holds.
            Recalls:
              1.  If recall is combined with hold, and an item on
                  hold is returned first; remove recall.
              2.  For all removed recalls, restore original due date
                  and fix action record accordingly.
              3.  For all removed recalls, check patron record for
                  block for overdue recall.  If this was the only
                  overdue recall, remove block.
              4.  If this was only recall, remove RECALL status from
                  patron charge index and restore original due date
                  and fines policy for original borrower.  If recall
                  notice has not been printed, do not print recall
                  notice.
              5.  Print "RECALL CANCELED" notice for the patron.
            Holds:
            Simplify process for canceling or moving first hold
            after item has been discharged.  If Item Available
            Notice has not been printed, the request record to
            print Notice should be removed or request should be
            ignored by LB610.

Rationale:        Recalls:
            To restore original circulation policy to original
            borrower, the item must be discharged, the charge
            screen backdated, and the item recharged to the
            original borrower.  If canceled holds were taken care
            of by the system, it would save staff time, reduce the
            probability of staff error, and eliminate a major cause
            of patron (and staff) frustration.
            Holds:
            To remove the hold, staff must look up the Patron ID,
            charge the item to the patron and then discharge the
            item.  This complicated process consumes a lot of staff
            time and distorts circulation statistics.

                               Systemwide Holds

Statement:        Enhance systemwide hold functionality.

              1.  Create mechanism to transfer location, group or
                  systemwide recall/hold queues to newly added item
                  records.  NOTIS recognizes that more items must be
                  added when there are many holds on an item (the
                  THRESH parameter in LC106).  When an new item
                  record is created, there is no way to transfer the
                  existing recall/hold queue to the new item record.

              2.  Increase number of patrons which can be stored in
                  the recall/hold queue.  Since the recall/hold
                  queue is stored in the item record, the number of
                  patrons in the recall/hold queue is limited by the
                  size of the item record--about 100 patrons.
              3.  In Circulation Activity Totals, count location,
                  group or system-wide hold as one hold instead as
                  one hold for each item.
              4.  Fix routing problem with location, group and
                  system-wide holds.  If an item is not discharged
                  at the pickup location, the hold at the top of a
                  queue is not removed from other item records until
                  the item is discharged at the pickup location.  If
                  other items are discharged before the first item
                  arrives and is discharged at the pickup location,
                  they are routed to first pickup location.  When an
                  item is discharged, the hold request at the top of
                  the queue should be deleted from all other item
                  records, regardless of whether the item will need
                  to be routed or not.
              5.  Allow location holds on multiple-copies.  When a
                  location hold is placed on an item with copy
                  status of 2 or 3, display a message:  "This copy
                  has multiple-items.  Place hold on all items (y/n)
                  (_)"

Rationale:          1.  To transfer the recall/hold queue to added
                        item records requires that:  information from
                        all holds be printed/written down; all holds
                        (except the first if the item is in) be
                        removed; and then all holds be re-entered.
                        This makes the system unworkable for popular
                        items when there are a moderate number of
                        patrons in the queue.
              2.  The limit on the size of the queue makes system-
                  wide holds unworkable.  Storing all holds in all
                  applicable item records is an inefficient use of
                  storage space, and updating all these items
                  multiplies the number of transactions.
              3.  Standard library practice when a patron places a
                  hold request is to count this as one hold, not one
                  hold for all copies owned.
              4.  The routing problem delays the date when a patron
                  receives held items as several copies chase the
                  patron at the top of the queue from branch to
                  branch.
              5.  There are many cases when it is desirable to place
                  a location hold  on all items of a multi-volume
                  work.  The most common is the 2 volume monograph.
                  Placing holds on all desired items manually takes
                  a lot of staff time.  If more than one copy is
                  owned, then the reserves for the items which do
                  not return first must be manually removed.

Note:             Placing the recall/hold queue in a separate record
                  with links to item records could address all these
                  problems and would save space and transactions.

                           Override Recall Due Date

Statement:        Allow recall due date specified in table to be
                  overridden.

Rationale:        There are situations where the table specified
                  date is inappropriate, but there is no mechanism
                  for overriding the date.

                        Display Number of Holds in OPAC

Statement:        Display number of holds on item in OPAC, when item
                  is charged to patron.  This number displays when
                  the item is on the hold shelf and the number of
                  recalls displays.  The number of holds did display
                  before system-wide holds (pre-4.4).

Rationale:        This generates ill will because patrons assume
                  from the LUIS display that they can place a hold
                  and be first in the queue.

                          Automatic Billing for Holds

Statement:        Allow for the automatic creation of bill & fine
                  records for holds.  This could be driven by
                  parameters in the Loan/Overdue portion of the
                  circulation policy table similar to the Bill &
                  Fines parameter used to determine replacement
                  fees.

Rationale:        The automatic creation of bill & fine records when
                  a hold is placed would save a lot of staff time in
                  those institutions which charge for holds.

                               Add Page Function

Statement:        Add page function which would operate like a hold
                  on an item which is not charged out.  After an
                  item has been paged, a slip/request would print at
                  a table designated printer for home service unit
                  of the item.  If the home service unit does not
                  have a designated printer the slip/request would
                  print as part of the batch circulation program.
                  The slip/request would include call number,
                  enum/chron, author, title, item ID, patron name
                  and patron ID.  If the owning service unit and
                  placing service unit are the same no item
                  available notice would print.  If the owning and
                  requesting service units are not the same, an item
                  available notice would be generated when the item
                  is discharged at the requesting service unit.
                  System would interface with ILL portion of
                  PACLink.

Rational:   This enhancement would be of immense help in several
            types of situations:
                 Inter-branch loans in institutions with multiple
                  branches.
                 Inter-Library loans in consortiums.
                 Libraries with closed stacks.
                 Requests by remote users.

                        User-Initiated Recall/Hold/Page

Statement:        Add function to allow patrons to initiate recalls,
                  holds and pages.  Function would operate similarly
                  to staff function but with cleaner screens,
                  including online help and explain screens.  Patron
                  would:  enter patron ID; system would check for
                  blocks and eligibility for recall/hold/page;
                  patron would search for item using OPAC commands;
                  patron would select item; system would choose page
                  if item not charged, or if charged would offer
                  recall or hold (if security permitted); system
                  would check for existing recall/hold by same
                  patron and prevent duplicate requests; system
                  would place recall/hold/page; patron would be
                  offered option to request additional items.
                  Security for placing user-initiated request would
                  be by patron category limited by service unit, and
                  could be different from staff-initiated requests.


Rational:   A well-designed user-initiated request function would
            take a load off of staff.  Due to potential policy
            problems, self-service page is more important than
            hold, and hold is more important than recall.

                               LSYS File Changes

Statement:        In Loan/Overdue policy, separate "Allow holds,
                  recalls, and rush recalls".  Allow option for
                  recalls not to bump holds in the queue at the
                  service unit level.  Add to patron category
                  policy, list of patron categories that recalls are
                  allowed from.

Rational:   There are some circulation situations where it is
            desirable for a hold to be allowed but not a recall
            (ie. 3 day loan items) and vice versa (ie. indefinite
            loans).  Some institutions do not want recalls to
            automatically go to the top of the queue.  Some
            institutions want recall permissions hierarchically
            structured--faculty can recall from students, grad
            student from undergrads, etc.

                 Number of Holds on Recall/Hold Fill-in Screen

Statement:        Carry number of holds over from item record
                  display to recall/hold fill-in screen.

Rational:   This important piece of information is lost when SELect
            command is issued to display the recall/hold fill-in
            screen.

                Better Charge/Discharge Display for Held Items

Statement:        When recalled/held item is discharged, allow
                  option to display name of person requesting item
                  is to be held below "Place item on hold shelf"
                  message.  Place items being held counter in patron
                  record and display on charge screen (see Patron
                  Record and Charge/Discharge enhancement requests).


Rational:   Many institutions need to attach the patron's name to
            items on the hold shelf and currently this requires
            displaying the item record.  Patrons who place
            recalls/holds are frequent library users who often have
            items on the hold shelf for which the Item Available
            notice has not been received.  An indication of items
            being held on the charge screen would save the patron
            another trip to the library.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU