HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail v2.3 (R1).
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 11:10:16 CDT
From:         Bob Samson <SAMSON@LIBRARY.UTA.EDU>
Subject:      Re: fix - keyword with apostrophe
Comments: To: NOTIS-L@VM.TCS.Tulane.EDU

Ron,

How does your fix work with searches which include other uses of the
apostrophe, such as K='NEAR' ADJ EAST ?  I suspect searches of this
type are far less common than the K=O'BRIEN type of search, but it
would be nice to know that the fix does not disable this other
feature.

> For 5.0.2 sites (not earlier releases) who find that keyword O'BRIEN gives
 zero
> hits:  deleting two lines of code in LPC100P will fix this problem.
>
> NB:  This fix has now been checked out in a test region using the 5.0.2 OPAC.
>
> After label SRQF01, look for the comment SHIFT DATA OVER FOR QUOTES.  The next
> two lines prevent this function for a keyword search.  Delete them.
>
> Ron Johnston  McGill University Libraries  Montreal Quebec
>

Bob Samson
Assistant Director for Automation Services
University of Texas at Arlington
University Libraries
P.O. Box 19497
Arlington, TX  76019

(817) 273-3000 x4955
SAMSON@LIBRARY.UTA.EDU
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Subject: (no subject given)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 12:19:15 -0500
From:         capital!efry@UUNET.UU.NET
Comments: To: NOTIS-L@VM.TCS.Tulane.EDU

remote execution	[uucp job uunetCKbQ4 (9/3-12:14:07)]
	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 09:37:35 EST
From:         Debbie Morrow <morrowd@GVSU.EDU>
Subject:      LB360 "Error 16"

   This is for those of you who work a lot with (and maybe understand!) the
   conflict & error detection output and the MARC Authorities Format -- I am
   a relative novice with LB360 in particular.

   Since installing 5.02 in Prod. in June, the C&DE reports have turned up
   conflicts/errors which they never used to, and have reported on same in
   records that were in long before 5.02 was installed.  Hmmmm!  We are
   making an effort to understand and clean up a few remaining mystery
   entries on the reports before introducing a whole new can of worms with
   our Gov.Docs tape load in a few weeks.  Here is one "error" I just can't
   quite see my way through:

   Error 16 purportedly looks for corresspondence between the use of |w___d
   in a 5xx and of 665 -- i.e. if you have used |w___d to suppress the
   display of a given 5xx, you should have a 665 which contains a paragraph
   laying out the complex reference or history involved.  A number of
   entries in our Error 16 report appeared to be perfectly consistant in
   this regard, or else to have _niether_ 5xx |w___d OR a 665 -- completely
   outside the definition of the error.  Upon further examination of the
   records involved, it appears that what LB360 is looking for is
   corresspondence between a suppressed 5xx in one authority record and the
   existance of the 665 *in the authority record for that heading as a 1xx*:
   NUG Cat & Auth certainly didn't make THAT clear!  Is it actually supposed
   to work that way?  Even the USMARC Concise Formats seems to suggest that
   use of 5xx |w___d is associated with use of 665 *in the same* authority
   record ...  So, logically or illogically, I have figured out how and
   where to bring consistancy to these related authority records and to get
   the 665 notes to display in OPAC -- except for the records for Germany /
   Germany (West) / Germany (Territory ...) / etc.:  I can't get the 665 for
   these geographical names (x51's) to display in OPAC at all.

   I am looking forward to any explanations of the intended use of those
   fields in authority records and/or of the behavior of CD&E Error 16 that
   will make this more intelligible!  Many thanks --

   Debbie

   Debbie Morrow / Automation Librarian/LIB1
   University Library / 108 JHZ
   Grand Valley State University / Allendale  MI   49401
   616/895-3581 / Internet: morrowd@gvsu.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: University of South Carolina
X-Acknowledge-To: <C0105@UNIVSCVM>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Wed, 2 Sep 1992 11:46:29 EDT
From:         Deborah Coleman <C0105@UNIVSCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      RE: GTO - LGT700B
              31 Aug 1992 10:51:43 -0500 from <F_WILLIAMS@CCSVAX.SFASU.EDU>

THE 5.02 VERSION OF LGT700B WORK WITH LGT7001/2 GOING TO SYSOUT AND NOT TO
DSN BECAUSE OF THE PRINTMOD MACRO.
   THE 5.02 VERSIONS OF LB010JC3/6 WORK ONLY IF 1) DO NOT PLAN TO PROCESS
4.6 VERSIONS OF LIREQP/C FILES AND 2)ONLY IF YOU DON'T USE TAPE.  TAPE NOT WORK
FOR RESTARTS BECAUSE YOU ARE USING DIRECT ACCESS TO MARK SPECIFIC RECORDS
FOR REPROCESSING.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: University of Texas at Arlington
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Fri, 4 Sep 1992 14:18:46 CDT
From:         Gina Gestautas <C231GNG@UTARLVM1.BITNET>
Subject:      NOTIS Financial Feed to Business Office

Hi all,

I have a quick question regarding offloading financial obligations to
an outside source.

1.  If you use the X code (externally billed) does that mean you have to
    add an f04 field to the bill and fine file??

2.  Using Harry Samuels approach to this problem.. he writes out payments
    balancing the obligation with a payment of equal value. (this is
    in the NOTISPRO program BILLFINE SAS)  It appears that he does NOT
    use the external approach, but just offsets the amount by an equal payment.
    Has anyone else implemented his program and/or found any problems with
    it??  Any help would be appreciated as this holiday weekend crashes upon
    me.

Gina Gestautas - Tech1        NOTIS 5.0.2, MDAS 1.2.1, NotisSearch 1.0
C231GNG@UTARLVM1              University of Texas at Arlington
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 11:38:00 EDT
From:         Ron Johnston <ADLB001@MVS.MCGILL.CA>
Subject:      fix - keyword with apostrophe
Comments: To: Notis Discussion <NOTIS-L@VM.TCS.TULANE.EDU>

For 5.0.2 sites (not earlier releases) who find that keyword O'BRIEN gives zero
hits:  deleting two lines of code in LPC100P will fix this problem.

NB:  This fix has now been checked out in a test region using the 5.0.2 OPAC.

After label SRQF01, look for the comment SHIFT DATA OVER FOR QUOTES.  The next
two lines prevent this function for a keyword search.  Delete them.

Ron Johnston  McGill University Libraries  Montreal Quebec

voice:        (514) 398-4797          |    S/390  ES/9000-320
fax:          (514) 398-7356          |    MVS/XA  CICS 1.7
internet:     ADLB001@MVS.MCGILL.CA   |    NOTIS 4.6.1
bitnet:       ADLB001@MCGILLVS        |    GTO 2-Utlas
telnet:       132.206.27.5            |    GTO 3-Bibliofile
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Thu, 27 Aug 1992 13:35:30 CDT
From:         Barbara <BAUGHMAN@UTDALLAS.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: kwb search exhausting temp stor

As far as I know, the only solution is to increase the size of temporary
storage.  Of course, being a VSE site with only the standard HESC software,
I could be more limited in choices than other sites.

I calculated the suggested temporary storage based on NSI's formula, and
rounded it up to 10 cyclinders.  After reading some stories on NOTIS-L,
I increased it to 50 cylinders.  So far we haven't used more than 15% of
the allocated temporary storage according to the daily CICS shutdown
statistics.  Of course, we have only been running LMS 5.0.x since
the summer, a slow time for our campus.  We also haven't purposely tried
any incredible monster searches to my knowledge.

We are a relatively small site, with about 300,000 bibliographic records
that span about 470 cylinders.  Knowing that temporary storage must
contain references to bib records that would require far less space than
the actual bib file, I figured 50 cylinders should handle just about the
entire file (nothing scientific about this; strictly SWAGing).
As long as users can do searches that would retrieve just
about the entire file, I figure I better give them the space.

Depending on the tools available, there are probably other approaches.
It would be interesting to hear what sites have done to fine-tune the
size of temporary storage.

Barbara Baughman                *********************************
TECH1                           *                               *
University of Texas at Dallas   *   First right, then rewrite!  *
(214) 690-2157                  *                               *
BAUGHMAN@UTDALLAS.BITNET        *********************************
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: Indiana University Music Library
X-Acknowledge-To: <PAPAKHI@IUBVM>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 12:29:53 EST
From:         "A. Ralph Papakhian" <PAPAKHI@IUBVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Light at the end of the Se-Lin tunnel?
              2 Sep 1992 20:55:00 CST from <GEMLI@CANAL.CRC.UNO.EDU>

We've been using Vernon labels for quite a while (not with NOTIS,
but with the Vernon software).  It's worked just fine, especially
when we think back about playing with the SE-LIN device.
Ever forward.

Most cordially,
A. Ralph Papakhian, Music Library (Co-Listowner for MLA-L@IUBVM)
Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 47405
(812) 855-2970  papakhi@iubvm.bitnet papakhi@iubvm.ucs.indiana.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Fri, 4 Sep 1992 08:52:11 CST
From:         Noel Young <YOUNG@CMSUVMA.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Minutes of the BNA/NOTIS SIG - San Francisco, June 1992

Dear Les,

That was exciting stuff.

                        Noel
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Thu, 27 Aug 1992 14:34:55 EST
From:         "Marlene Kemski, Univ. of Windsor" <MARLENE@UCC.UWINDSOR.CA>
Subject:      Re: S0C7 in LD300
Comments: To: NOTIS/DOBIS discussion group list <NOTIS-L@VM.TCS.Tulane.EDU>
              25 Aug 1992 13:15:09 CST from
              <VB7R0007%SMUVM1.bitnet@VM.TCS.Tulane.EDU>

Micheal,

I've tried sending info directly to you but my messages keep coming back
as undelivered.

If you want, you may call me.  I have an 'idea' about the oc7 abend in
LD300.




************************************************************************
* Marlene Kemski                      *                                *
* Systems Analyst                     *   Releases:                    *
* Computing Services                  *              NOTIS LMS 5.0.2,  *
* University of Windsor               *              GTO       3.0,    *
*                                     *              CICS      1.7,    *
* Voice:  (519) 253-4232 x.2737       *              MVS/SP            *
* Fax  :  (519) 973-7083              *                                *
************************************************************************
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <farrington@a1.relay.upenn.edu>
Msg-Class: ALL-IN-1 V2.3 BL8-4 Rev. AAC 20-Dec-1988
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Tue, 25 Aug 1992 16:52:01 -0400
From:         Jean Farrington <farrington@A1.RELAY.UPENN.EDU>
Subject:      VHLD Conversion--Option A--866 or 899?
Comments: To: notisacq@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu, notis-l@tcsvm.BITNET

	I would be interested in hearing from libraries that selected
Option A for converting their VHLD records to MHLD with an indication of
whether or not they chose 866 or 899 fields for their data.  My inclination
has been to go with 899, but I am concerned since this is not a field tag
in the MFHL standard that this might create problems outputting or dealing
with the data later.  Also, if you chose 866, how difficult was training
staff to input into this field which requires more precision than the 899.
	Any other comments or suggestions you might have would be most
welcome.  Penn is getting ready to test the options and hopes to make the
conversion in the fall.  This message has been posted to both NOTIS-L and
NOTIS-ACq.

	Thanks for your help.

		--Jean Farrington
		Head, Serials Dept.
		Univ. of Pennsylvania
		farrington@a1.relay.upenn.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 10:28:03 CDT
From:         Rita Millican <LLMILL@LSUVM.BITNET>
Subject:      country codes for currency conversion

We are just getting ready to work with currency conversion in release
5.0.2.  NOTIS recommends that we "use currency codes from an international
standard list, Codes for the Representation of Currencies and Funds
ISO 4217:1990(E/F)."  Does anyone know how to obtain a copy of that
easily?  Our main library does not have it.

Thanks for your help.

Rita Millican
Law Library, Louisiana State University
Baton Rouge, LA 70803-1010

Ph. 504 388-4045
LLMILL at LSUVM.Bitnet
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Fri, 4 Sep 1992 11:40:52 EDT
From:         Lisa McDavid <D020214@UNIVSCVM.CSD.SCAROLINA.EDU>
Subject:      Repeating message from capital!taylouunet.uu.net
Comments: To: NOTIS-L@VM.TCS.TULANE.EDU

Did anyone ever find out what that was all about yesterday?  I tried mailing a
query directly to the address, and it came back undeliverable.  I'm not fluent
in computerese, so all I got out of the alphabet soup was that whatever that
address is, there is no user named taylor.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: Southern Methodist University
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Thu, 27 Aug 1992 15:34:25 CST
From:         "Michael J. Stephens" <VB7R0007@SMUVM1.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: S0C7 in LD300
              27 Aug 1992 14:34:55 EST from <MARLENE@UCC.UWINDSOR.CA>

Well, I have an answer to the problem I flamed about the other day.  I
am NOT withdrawing my comments, here, only providing an explanation for
what happened.  The media services librarian placed an item into the
course reserve whose bib record had been tape loaded two years ago.  No
one had looked at the bib record.  The filing indicator in the 245 tag
had a non numeric value, it should have been 00.  It showed online as
0? when we looked at it.  LD300 packs that field before using it as a
number.  The pack operation doesn't care what it is packing, but the
following operation does, giving a S0C7.  To me this is an example of
lazy programming since the program does not attempt to check for non-
numeric values before packing.  I guess it was assumed that the field
would have been properly edited before ever getting into the database.
This is not a good assumption since there are numerous ways a record can
enter the file and none of them seem to edit the same way.  Also, if you
just look at the record your eye may not pick up the problem (especially
if you are not a cataloger).  The online program does not edit the record
unless you make a change to it.  There should be a PF key defined to tell
the online program to edit the record anyway.  There should also be a
batch edit program that provides a list of records with problems that are
usually caught by the online program.  It could pass each record read
against the online edit routine.  Ah well.  My Grandmother used to say
"Wish in one hand and spit in the other, then see which gets full faster."
Thanks for listening to my rambling.  And thanks to thos who offered
help and suggestions.  Now, we just have to wait for the results of tonight's
LD300 run to see if there are any more problem records.

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
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail v2.3 (R1).
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Wed, 2 Sep 1992 10:41:04 CDT
From:         WANG@LIBRARY.UTA.EDU
Subject:      NUGM

I am looking for a female room-mate to share the cost with me at
the Palmer House for NUGM (Oct. 8-10th).

Since I am not a NOTIS-L subscriber, please reply directly to me.

Thanks.


Terry Wang
Govt. Pub. and Maps Dept.
University of Texas at Arlington Lib.

(817) 273-3000, ex. 4968
FAX: (817) 273-3392
Email: wang@library.uta.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 17:01:04 CDT
From:         Nancy Pope <LBYSEC@LSUVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: HANDICAPPED NOTIS WORKSTATIONS

Please reply to the list about equipment for the handicapped to access
particularly NOTIS, or send to me also. Thanks.

Nancy N. Pope                 Phone:    504/388-3215
Assistant to the Dean         FAX:      504/388-6992
LSU Libraries                 BITNET:   LBYSEC@LSUVM
104 Middleton Library         Internet: LBYSEC@LSUVM.SNCC.LSU.EDU
Louisiana State University    LMS 5.0.2, CICS 1.7, GTO 3.0
Baton Rouge, LA  70803
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"NOTIS-L@TCSVM.BITNET",DIXON
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Mon, 31 Aug 1992 08:15:00 CDT
From:         Edie Dixon <DIXON@MACC.WISC.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [Stephen Davis: Points for Enhancement surveys]

I called NOTIS and got this answer on the survey

20 points total for the LMS, 5 points total for GTO (we don't have MDAS) and the
due date for all is Sept. 23

Edie Dixon, LIB1
U of Wisconsin
bitnet: DIXON@wiscmacc
phone: 608-262-3525
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Fri, 28 Aug 1992 09:33:44 EST
From:         "Sally Gale, Indiana State" <LIBGALE@INDST.BITNET>
Subject:      Claims on 5.1

Indiana State University installed Release 5.1 this past weekend.
We have discovered that there is a problem printing claim memos.
NOTIS staff are working on it and we hope the "fix" will be
forthcoming.  However, don't waste time trying to figure out what
went wrong if this happens to you.  Call NOTIS and see if they've
fixed it!

Sally Gale                            libgale@indst.bitnet
Head of Acquisitions                  libgale@cml.indstate.edu
Indiana State University Libraries
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Wed, 26 Aug 1992 09:11:00 CDT
From:         "Alice F. Permenter" <$L$LB48@LUCCPUA.BITNET>
Subject:      690 field and MHI

Loyola successfully brought up NOTIS release 5.0.2 on Saturday, August
22nd.  (Applause, loud cheers!)
.
In processing our New Headings report for authority control this week
we found a problem with 7xx fields on records which also contain a
690 (local subject heading) field.
.
Merged Headings Index in staff mode shows following info:
.
BONNE MAISON ALONSO DE
          *ESTABLISHED HEADING  (LC 100 cab)
   .PRIMERA TERCERA DECADA DE LAS GUERRAS DE FL  <1682>  (LC 970)
.
Note the information at the end of the title line which tells you that
the heading appears in a 970 field on the bibliographic record.  This
is a valid provisional field, but we rarely see it as our acquisitions
people don't usually get excessive enough to include added authors on
provisional records.
.
When we view the bibliographic record the heading *actually* appears
in a 700 field.  Further investigation reveals that this bibliographic
record was *never* a provisional record.
.
The problem appears to be associated with the use of a local 690
subject field.  Apparently the programming to index the 690 field
affects the treatment of all fields following.  The 690 is being
indexed as a provisional field which works just fine.  However, all
fields following the 690 are being treated as provisional also.
.
If your library uses the 690 field for local subjects, please verify
that this is happening in your staff side index also.  We have
reported the problem to NOTIS, Inc.  The PROBLEM TRACKING NUMBER is
PPQ8144.
.
Thanks.
.
Alice F. Permenter
Head, Online Catalog Management
Loyola University of Chicago
$L$LB48@luccpua.bitnet     (312) 508-2656
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Subject: (no subject given)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Fri, 4 Sep 1992 15:19:47 -0500
From:         capital!taylor@UUNET.UU.NET
Comments: To: NOTIS-L@VM.TCS.Tulane.EDU

remote execution	[uucp job uunetCeOB4 (9/4-14:22:18)]
	rmail efry sdewey
exited with status 1


	===== stderr was =====
Usage: rmail username
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Subject: (no subject given)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 12:22:07 -0500
From:         capital!efry@UUNET.UU.NET
Comments: To: NOTIS-L@VM.TCS.Tulane.EDU

remote execution	[uucp job uunetCKJV4 (9/3-12:13:52)]
	rmail efry sdewey
exited with status 1


	===== stderr was =====
Usage: rmail username
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: notis-l@TCSVM.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"notis-l@tcsvm.bitnet"
X-VMS-Cc: BAH
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Sat, 29 Aug 1992 09:04:00 EST
From:         Barbara Hieber <BAH@PITTVMS.BITNET>
Subject:      GTO - LGT700B

We have not had any problems with LGT700B of which I am aware.  In fact,
that might be the only part of GTO we haven't had problems with.
(My fingers are crossed as I write this.)

We're at 5.0.2 (MVS), but didn't have a problem with 5.0.1 either.
Apart from backing up the ESDS file before running the job, we don't
do anything special.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* Barbara Hieber                       PHONE:        (412) 648-7698 *
* Systems Analyst                        FAX:        (412) 648-1245 *
* University Library System           BITNET:           BAH@PITTVMS *
* G-33 Hillman Library              INTERNET:  BAH@VMS.CIS.PITT.EDU *
* University of Pittsburgh                     Pittsburgh, PA 15260 *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"NOTIS-L@TCSVM.BITNET",DIXON
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Tue, 1 Sep 1992 13:00:00 CDT
From:         Edie Dixon <DIXON@MACC.WISC.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Charge to LOST appearing on Search List

When you charge something to lost, it does appear on the Search list -- once and
once only (unlike the missing stuff which can follow a specific scedule of
appearing on the search list, depending on options you choose in the locations
menu of lsys).

Edie Dixon, LIB1
U of Wisconsin
bitnet: DIXON@wiscmacc
phone: 608-262-3525
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
From: jlc5f@poe.acc.Virginia.EDU (Jean L. Cooper)
Subject: Re:      1993 LMS Enhancement Survey
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 16:15:06 GMT

Maybe we should identify the duplicates, post them here,
and agree that a vote for one of them is a vote for all
of them?

Jean Cooper
University of Virginia
LIB2
--
Jean L. Cooper    (BITNET: JLC5F@virginia.edu   CIS: 70253,1114)
"The true University of these days is a Collection of Books." 
                                           --Carlyle                        
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Thu, 27 Aug 1992 12:06:03 EDT
From:         Mark Ludwig <ULDMJL@UBVM.BITNET>
Subject:      LCRFILE CPO records

I am having trouble with circulation policy records in version 5.02.
I found that LSYS adds CPO records with a significantly different
record structure than the CPO records that came with 5.0.

The 5.0 format works and the records can be sucessfully updated and
remain in the 5.0 format. The new records added under 5.02 are not
found when you try to enter them into a circulation situation.

Has anyone out there successfully added a new circ policy and
got it working in a circ situation under 5.02?

Mark Ludwig
SUNY at Buffalo
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU