HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Mon, 31 Aug 1992 10:40:00 EDT
From:         "Darren.Meahl" <20676DOC@MSU.BITNET>
Subject:      Personal to Joseph Barnes

Thank you, Joseph Barnes, for faxing your computer center/library agreement!
I REALLY appreciate it!

Darren Meahl
Michigan State U.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Fri, 4 Sep 1992 15:57:14 EDT
From:         Lydia Pettis <LRP@CORNELLC.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: NOTIS Financial Feed to Business Office

Cornell is using a customized version of the BILLFINE SAS program for
our automated pass to the bursar and subsequent updating of NOTIS bill
and fine records. We are NOT using 'X'. When we update a record we
update the payment portion of the F70 field (I think that's it) with the
amount paid (= amount of bill which was passed to bursar) and a special
payment code of 'PV'. We have found the use of special payment type/code
options to be quite helpful in terms of reports:

PH--paid cash         FH--forgive fine
PV--sent to bursar    FV--lost book returned (charge forgiven)
PK--paid check        FK--bad debt

Our circ staff are trained to enter the appropriate codes. The only one
used in online updating is PV. We will probably be automating the pass
of information to the collections agency, and may look into the use of
'x' then.


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*  Lydia Pettis                    PHONE:  (607) 255-9477   *
*  Programmer/Analyst              BITNET: LRP @ CORNELLC   *
*  501 Olin Library                                         *
*  Cornell University              FAX:    (607) 255-9346   *
*  Ithaca, NY  14850                                        *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: Slippery Rock University - Computer Center
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Sun, 30 Aug 1992 16:50:02 EDT
From:         Fran Hensler <FJH@SRU.BITNET>
Subject:      CICS Good Morning Transaction Exit

Hello everyone!  I've been reading the list for about 4 months and this
is my first post.  SRU has just installed its first release of NOTIS (5.0.2).
I'd like to install a CICS Good Morning Message Exit to display 'NOTIS'
in a banner across the screen.  I've never coded a CICS exit and I was
wondering if some kind soul would send me an example.

Thanks in advance.
/Fran

Francis J. Hensler, CDP                     BITNET: FJH@SRU
Software Support Specialist                 Phone: (412) 738-2033
Slippery Rock University Computer Center    PANET:     8-654-2033
Slippery Rock, PA  16057-1326  USA   "Yes, Virginia, there is a Slippery Rock"
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: notis-l@tcsvm.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Fri, 4 Sep 1992 12:17:46 LCL
From:         Sally Grucan <SGRUCAN@WESLEYAN.BITNET>
Subject:      MLHD Conversion

I second Lydia Pettis' request for the low-down on VHLD statements that run
on for more than one line.

Back in late '89 and early '90, I corresponded with NOTIS programmer Cindy
Wichman about this matter, prompted by comments she made at the '89 NUGM
meeting.  The upshot of it was that she was "not sure," but that she thought
my interpretation of what do do with subsequent lines was "probably" correct.
Since then, what Wesleyan has been doing, with the intention of using conversion
option B, is:
     -- For holdings (866), indent 4 spaces
     -- For SUPPLEMENTS (867) AND INDEXES (868), indent 4 spaces
     -- For public notes (|z of related field/852 |z), indent 4 spaces and
        begin with a single or double asterisk as appropriate
     -- For nonpublic notes (852 |x), begin with |a  |a
We do not used SHELVED AS notes (852 |l).

Prompted by Lydia's comments, I see now that, except for SHELVED AS data,
there appears to be nothing in written form about run-on lines.  Pessimist
that I am, I would rather know the bad news now than later.  I would be just
as interested in responses from those considering option A, as at least one of
our consortium-mates intends to go that route.  Thank you.

                                                -- Sally Grucan



Sally Grucan                      BITNET:  sgrucan@wesleyan
Systems Planning and              INTERNET:  sgrucan@eagle.wesleyan.edu
   Head Catalog Librarian         Phone:  (203) 347-9411 ext. 3007
Olin Library                      Fax:  (203) 344-7969
Wesleyan University
Middletown CT O6459-0108
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Thu, 27 Aug 1992 14:40:24 EDT
From:         Rob Kairis <RKAIRIS@KENTVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: kwb search exhausting temp stor

Warren,

Kent State University faced the same type of problem a few months ago.
You need to identify the search.  In our case it was  k=b.  Since the
fixed field for MARC format was indexed in keyword, the search attempted
to retrieve all of our Book format (FMT b) records (a million or so).  In this
case you cannot add "a" to the stopword list because indexed fixed field
elements do not use the stopword list.  Our only solution was to remove the
MARC format element from the keyword index.  Another solution, if your
lucky enough, is to increase temp storage to accommodate the vast number
of records retrieved by such a broad search.

Rob Kairis
Systems Librarian
Kent State University
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: Southern Methodist University
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Tue, 25 Aug 1992 13:15:09 CST
From:         "Michael J. Stephens" <VB7R0007@SMUVM1.BITNET>
Subject:      S0C7 in LD300

I am getting tired of this.  I am also getting tired of flaming about it,
but I'm afraid that if I stop people will get complacent about it.

<FLAME ON!!!>

The course reserve index generation abended last night with a S0C7.  Once
again the program did not trap the problem, did not print any information
about the offending field or even the offending record, and did not
continue on to create a useable index sans the offending item.  I consider
this to be a design flaw in many if not most of the batch programs.  I
beleive that fixing this should have a very high priority at NSI.  Higher
even than"enhancements".  This type of problem wastes my time, my librarians
time, and even NOTIS's time.  It should be relatively straightforward to
modify the programs to handle many common types of errors, especially numeric
fields that contain non-numeric data.  It would even be nice if NSI would
say that this will be repaired by version 5.x.  (I do believe that course
reserve will be re-written in version 5.2, but I have already been waiting
too long.)  Aarrgh!

<flame off>

I appologize for having to inflict my viewpoints on people who have heard
it all before.  Anyway the PTS# is PPQ8136.  We are at LMS 5.0.1, CICS 2.11,
MVS/XA, and near the end of my rope.

Michael J. Stephens, Tech1
Sr. Systems Analyst II           *  Phone:    (214) 692-3453
Computer & Information Services  *  FAX:      (214) 692-3449
Southern Methodist University    *  Bitnet:   vb7r0007@smuvm1
Dallas, Tx. 75275-0262           *  Internet: vb7r0007@vm.cis.smu.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Fri, 4 Sep 1992 16:12:00 EDT
Comments:     Converted from PROFS to RFC822 format by PUMP V2.2
From:         Dan Kirchner <344PWCF@CMUVM.BITNET>
Subject:      NOTIS Financial Feed to Business Office

Hi, Gina.  If you want to see a COBOL method of this, you can look in
NOTISPRO, program named 'LIB018'.  The results seem to work for our
CIRC folks in that they see what they want to see in the resulting
screen displays (PBIL).  NSI has stated the 'X' feature of external
billing is an 'undeveloped process' and probably will not support
any processing outside NSI programs.  However, we are going ahead with
it by using my program to alter the Bill-Fine and Patron records.
I hope its example helps you find what you need.
Dan Kirchner
TECH 1 Central Michigan University     "Underwhelmment Specialist"
FAX: (517) 774-4499 / VOICE: (517) 774-6643 / BITNET: 344PWCF@CMUVM
From: ULDBEV@ubvm.cc.buffalo.edu (Beverly Vander Kooy)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Subject: Re: CHAT L: C & UNIX
Date: 3 Sep 92 14:54:30 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo

In article <NOTIS-L%92090308525814@VM.TCS.TULANE.EDU>
SMUIR@UA1VM.BITNET writes:
 
>
>I tried to look up the original copy of this article.  I could not find
>an April 1 issue.  Is this cite really accurate?  Is this quote really true?
>
>********************************
>*  SCOTT P. MUIR               *
>*  THE UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA   *
>*  SMUIR@UA1VM                 *
>*  SMUIR@UA1VM.UA.EDU          *
>*  (205) 348-2299              *
>********************************
 
 
I would guess that the date of the issue "April 1" should be your first clue!
 
Beverly Vander Kooy
University at Buffalo
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Mon, 31 Aug 1992 10:22:01 EDT
Comments:     Converted from PROFS to RFC822 format by PUMP V2.2
From:         "pat" <34ATTUB@CMUVM.BITNET>
Subject:      690 field and MHI

 we have reformatted to 650 for most already can't find others will keep
an eye out.

            pat
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Sun, 30 Aug 1992 16:10:49 CDT
From:         WEILAND@TWSUVM.BITNET
Subject:      Points on enhancement ballot

Stephen,

Well, well, page 24 of the LMS *does* say that the LMS survey is to have only
10 points, not 20 as it seems to indicate on page 2.  Blows my theory out of
the water.

We do need some direction from NOTIS on this, right away.  September 16 or 24
is sooner than we think.

BTW, I agree with another posting on NOTIS-L that we should identify duplicate
or very close enhancements and decide which one sites should vote for, if that
enhancement is important to a given site.  I can't think of a better way to
handle this problem.  Anybody want to volunteer to collect them?

Sue Weiland, LIB 1
Wichita State Univ.
weiland@twsuvm.bitnet
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Subject: (no subject given)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 12:19:42 -0500
From:         capital!efry@UUNET.UU.NET
Comments: To: NOTIS-L@VM.TCS.Tulane.EDU

remote execution	[uucp job uunetCKT74 (9/3-12:14:03)]
	rmail efry sdewey
exited with status 1


	===== stderr was =====
Usage: rmail username
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 08:59:59 CDT
From:         "Colegate V. Spinks" <ZCVS@ADM.ANGELO.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Mail to NOTIS is undeliverable
Comments: To: NOTIS/DOBIS discussion group list <NOTIS-L@VM.TCS.Tulane.EDU>
              2 Sep 1992 19:06:57 EDT from <FJH%SRU.bitnet@VM.TCS.Tulane.EDU>

I tried the address "notis@TWAIN.NOTIS.COM" with similar results, I then
tried "notis%TWAIN.NOTIS.COM@VM.TCS.Tulane.EDU" with success. I suspect
some sort of router problem somewhere.. (Just guessing)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Tue, 1 Sep 1992 08:46:08 PDT
From:         James Cruse <CN.NX8@STANFORD.BITNET>
Subject:      Charge to LOST appearing on Search List

I was aware that charging an item to the "Missing" patron would
result in the item appearing on the Search List section of the Daily
Operations Report.  In addition, items which I charge to the LOST
patron also appear on the Search List.

Is this what's supposed to happen or do we have something special
going on here?

Jim Cruse
Stanford University
Release 5.0.1
No Production Circulation
......still in learning mode with Training

To:  NOTIS-L(NOTIS-L@TCSVM)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Fri, 28 Aug 1992 08:00:20 CDT
From:         Adnan Aldabaja <AAA1@DCCCDBIT.BITNET>
Subject:      abend oncode=9050 user=203

We ran lb610jc last night and we got abend oncode 9050 user=203 at first
step (lb610).  I have a PLI abend code manual but it does not have the
203 code.  Any ideas.  cics 1.7 mvs site notis v502


Thank in advance.

Adnan Aldabaja
Programmer/Analyst C
Dallas County Community College District
(214) 324-7922
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Fri, 28 Aug 1992 16:54:45 EDT
Comments:     Converted from PROFS to RFC822 format by PUMP V2.2
From:         Dan Kirchner <344PWCF@CMUVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Sending programs to NOTISPRO

'SENDFILE' them to U39328 @ UICVM.  Should work OK.  I think you may not
                        ^
have had the full address (U3932_).  Good luck with another try.
                                ^
Dan Kirchner
TECH 1 Central Michigan University     "Underwhelmment Specialist"
FAX: (517) 774-4499 / VOICE: (517) 774-6643 / BITNET: 344PWCF@CMUVM
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-To: PO%"notis-l@tcsvm"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 11:18:50 EST
From:         "Lorraine Olley, Preservation, IU Libraries,
              812/855-6281" <OLLEY@UCS.INDIANA.EDU>
Subject:      Looking for Jean Caswell

I would like to get in touch with Jean Caswell at Rice University
concerning programming to modify the NOTIS label function.  Please
respond to me directly, since I no longer subscribe to this list.
Thanks.

Lorraine Olley
Preservation Dept.
Indiana University Libraries
Bloomington IN 47405
olley@iubacs.bitnet
olley@ucs.indiana.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Subject: (no subject given)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 12:21:32 -0500
From:         capital!efry@UUNET.UU.NET
Comments: To: NOTIS-L@VM.TCS.Tulane.EDU

remote execution	[uucp job uunetCKMU4 (9/3-12:13:59)]
	rmail efry sdewey
exited with status 1


	===== stderr was =====
Usage: rmail username
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Fri, 28 Aug 1992 09:24:22 EDT
From:         Diane Hillmann <DH5@CORNELLC.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: VHLD Conversion--Option A--866 or 899?
              25 Aug 1992 16:52:01 -0400 from <farrington@A1.RELAY.UPENN.EDU>

To Jean Farrington:

I think you're wise to be concerned about the long term implications of
using 899 over 866.  Frankly, I don't see any reason to use 899.  The
original documentation NOTIS sent out about MARC Holdings conversion
suggested the use of 899 for those libraries who needed an interim
display before the "second phase" of MARC Holdings conversion (when
paired 85x/86x fields would display).  In that scenario, 866 fields were
for those folks who never intended to use 85x/86x.  Somehow, that
originally valid use for 899 has been corre
upted, and now I have heard people say that 899 should be used for
crummy, non-standard data and 866 for reasonably standard data.  Makes
no sense to me.  Unless you plan to manually convert all that 899 data
to 866, SOMEDAY you'll have to deal with the fact that all your holdings
info is in local, non-MARC tagged fields.  Are you sure you want to do
that?

Diane I. Hillmann
Cornell Law Library
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Fri, 4 Sep 1992 13:40:32 EDT
From:         Irene Pelak <pelak@PILOT.NJIN.NET>
Subject:      SAS Update question

I am trying to read the itefile, read the corresponding bib record for a value
 and update the item file with that value.  The basics of what I have tried
look like this:
     INFILE LBRITMF VSAM ....;
     FILE LBRITMF VSAM;
     INPUT ....
     PUT @1 _INFILE_ @;
     INFILE LBRBIBF VSAM ....;
     INPUT ......
     PUT @54 NAMT;
 I get a feedback code = 20.  Is my problem that I am trying to read the bib
record between the read and rewrite of the item file or is it more basic?
IRENE PELAK  TECH1  BERGEN COMMUNITY COLLEGE  201-447-9236
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Thu, 27 Aug 1992 14:29:43 EST
From:         Jim Zarecor <JLZ@JHUVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: MDAS and PsycINFO
              25 Aug 1992 10:32:27 CDT from <SAMSON@LIBRARY.UTA.EDU>

Bob:

     There is no software yet to correct existing records. Add on
records can be processed properly. This is PPQ7685. I reported it to
Helen Gbala in July. There is no priority established for the fix as
yet.

Jim Zarecor        Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore   JLZ@JHUVM
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Tue, 1 Sep 1992 11:16:00 EDT
From:         Ron Johnston <ADLB001@MVS.MCGILL.CA>
Subject:      pl1 oncodes
Comments: To: Notis Discussion <NOTIS-L%TCSVM.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>

As a postcript to the now solved problem of 0203 code issued by
PL/1:  I needed a couple of changes in order to get a dump in a
similar situation.

John Bodfish sent me a couple of lines of PL/1 which have the
effect of requesting a dump under certain error conditions.  It
looks something like ON ERROR SYSTEM DUMP, but that's definitely
not it exactly.

Secondly, and perhaps this is not related to the same problem, but
someone mentioned not getting a dump for an infinite loop.  We also
have a "system or installation option" that prevents dumps for
certain abend codes, including exceeding the cpu time limit.  There
is a solution under MVS which seems to be called SLIP-TRAP.  I guess
the idea is to slip out of the trap which catches and prevents dumps.
After a bit of prodding our systems programmers set me up a slip-trap
which allowed one particular job-name to give a dump for one
particular abend code.

Without a dump, I felt handcuffed and blind-folded.

Ron Johnston, Mc
................Gill University    (under MVS/XA)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Subject: (no subject given)
X-Envelope-to: NOTIS-L@TCSVM.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"NOTIS-L@TCSVM.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 15:43:00 EST
From:         "W.C. DIVENS" <N93774@PITTVMS.BITNET>

Will someone PLEASE find out what this bogus and ever-repetitive
message from capital!taylor@UUNET.UU.EDU is and shoot it please!

I will buy the bullets.

Rustbelt
From: F_WILLIAMS@CCSVAX.SFASU.EDU (LEIGH WILLIAMS)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Subject: RE: GTO - LGT700B
Date: 31 Aug 92 15:51:43 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Vmsmail-To: SMTP%"NOTIS-L@VM.TCS.Tulane.EDU"
Comments: To: NOTIS-L@VM.TCS.Tulane.EDU

We're still using the 4.6 version also.  Doesn't surprise me that you get
an operations exception out of the 5.x versions, though -- we get an OE out
of the 5.0.2 version of LB010JC6, and a data exception out of the 5.0.2
version of LB010JC3.  We're still running the 4.6 versions of those, too.
I am using the 5.0.2 version of LB610, however, with no ill effects.

This is one of those problems that make you say "hmmm...".  I decided not
to do the large amount of work required to figure it out and fix it, since
the 4.6 versions appear to get the job done.  It will become high priority
this fall when I install 5.1.

Leigh Williams
SFASU
F_WILLIAMS@CCSVAX.SFASU.EDU
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"NOTIS-L@TCSVM"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Wed, 2 Sep 1992 20:55:00 CST
From:         GEMLI@CANAL.CRC.UNO.EDU
Subject:      Re: Light at the end of the Se-Lin tunnel?

We were faced with ordering another year's worth of those horrid rolls of
Se-Lin-style labels.  Last year, we used Vernon instead of Gaylord, and
saved $ 10.00 per roll (20 vs. 30 dollars per roll).  Even though Vernon
says they're just as good, I don't think they are...the glue leaks out a
bit more, and the backing tends to come away from the labels, etc., etc.
And, of course, there is reloading the Device.  People have been known to
call in sick when it's time to reload the Device.  Well, in the last Vernon
catalog I saw the pin-feed version of the Se-Lin-style stock.  It's more
expensive than the roll stock (back to $ 30.00 per set), but we waste a lot
of roll stock (and time) anyway.  As far as I can tell, the Vernon product
is available now.  We're going to orders a few month's worth to see how it
goes.  We'll use a spare dot matrix printer instead of the Wheelwriter (with
the Device), and give it a try.  The clear tape is applied after the fact,
but it looks simple enough.  Is anybody currently using the pin-feed stuff
now?

Glenn Manino    University of New Orleans   Earl K. Long Library
GEMLI@UNO
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Fri, 4 Sep 1992 08:22:35 EDT
From:         Rob Kairis <RKAIRIS@KENTVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: MARC Holdings conversion problem...continuation lines

Lydia,

Which job are you using to convert your volume holdings, LCA898 or LCA899?
Also, which version are you using, 5.0, 5.0.1, or 5.0.2?  In looking at the
5.0.2 version of LCA899, it appears that no provision is made for statements
that continue using an indention.  Our records use indentation for SHELVED AS:
titles that are too long for a single volume holdings statement.  I am in the
process of putting in a fix to join these divided statements into one 852 MHLD
field.  Since we do not anticipate the need to join 866 fields, a fix for that
situation will probably not be developed here.

Rob Kairis
Systems Librarian
Kent State University
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
From: HBLADM94@UCONNVM.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Subject: (no subject given)
Date: 31 Aug 92 20:30:32 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU

//
Database Search DD=Rules
//rules DD   *
Search (function OR key) and (MHLD or Marc Holdings) in NOTIS-L
index
/*
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: Southern Methodist University
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Mon, 31 Aug 1992 11:40:10 CST
From:         "Michael J. Stephens" <VB7R0007@SMUVM1.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Re:Technical Enhancements
              31 Aug 1992 10:13:13 EDT from <pelak@PILOT.NJIN.NET>

On Mon, 31 Aug 1992 10:13:13 EDT Irene Pelak said:
>I was surprised by the absence of what would have been my number 1 choice:
>Avoid program abends from data exceptions.  Wherever possible identify the
>offending record(s) and continue processing.
>
>Did I miss something?  Has NOTIS agreed to make this a high priority item?
>Have we given up on asking for this?
>IRENE PELAK  TECH1  BERGEN COMMUNITY COLLEGE  201-447-9236

I thought about this a lot.  I did not list it as an enhancement because
I consider this sort of thing a design bug.  Several of us loud programmer
types met with NSI about this after last year's NUGM to make this complaint
and ask that somthing be done about it.  We argued that in the long run
NOTIS would save money in the support area because we would need their
support every time it happened.  I had to leave before the meeting was
completed, but the upshot is that Team NOTIS was created to provide some
level of quality assurance for new development.  I do not know if the
need for retrospective conversion (a neat librarian term) of existing
programs has been further addressed.  This can be a hot topic for the
combined Programmer's SIG meeting.  Team NOTIS will be giving us a report
of their activities as part of that meeting.  Perhaps we can get NOTIS to
commit to fixing this at that time.  We can only hope.

Michael J. Stephens, Tech1
Sr. Systems Analyst II           *  Phone:    (214) 692-3453
Computer & Information Services  *  FAX:      (214) 692-3449
Southern Methodist University    *  Bitnet:   vb7r0007@smuvm1
Dallas, Tx. 75275-0262           *  Internet: vb7r0007@vm.cis.smu.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Tue, 1 Sep 1992 13:19:13 EDT
From:         Rob Kairis <RKAIRIS@KENTVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Charge to LOST appearing on Search List

Jim,

Items charged to LOST will appear on the next printed Search list.  Unlike
MISSING items, LOST items appear only once on the list.

Rob Kairis
Systems Librarian
Kent State University
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU