+1 to holdings. I like that because it's consistent with "Holdings transfer" and can be either a copy or a volume. Holdings should be familiar to any librarian who used MARC record loads to create items 852 or 94x fields.
Janet Schrader Bibliographic Services Supervisor | CW MARS 67 Millbrook Street, Suite 201, Worcester, MA 01606 P: 508-755-3323 x 325 | F: 508-757-7801 ------------------------------ jschra...@cwmars.org || http;//cwmars.org <http://www.cwmars.org/> On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 4:06 PM, Sarah Childs <sar...@zionsvillelibrary.org> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 3:41 PM, Elaine Hardy <eha...@georgialibraries.org> > wrote: > >> I do like Holdings transfer. I think it is a good descriptor of what we >> are doing with the functionality. >> >> A little quibble, though with not having the button labelled Add volumes >> and copies. I realize that is cumbersome, however, it is more descriptive, >> especially from a cataloger's point of view. >> > > Maybe it should be labeled "Add Holdings"? Then it's distinct from both > Add Volumes and Add Copies. > > > -- > Sarah Childs > Technical Services Department Head > Hussey-Mayfield Memorial Public Library > 250 North Fifth Street > <https://maps.google.com/?q=250+North+Fifth+Street+%0D%0AZionsville,+IN+46077&entry=gmail&source=g> > Zionsville, IN 46077 > 317-873-3149 x13330 > sar...@zionsvillelibrary.org >
