1. The Bath Profile and UK National Union Catalogue Issues Peter Stubley Assistant Director for Academic Services University of Sheffield Library

2. UKNUC Feasibility Study Contract granted in May 2000 Final Report submitted April 2001 Available at http://www.uknuc.shef.ac.uk/http://www.uknuc.shef.ac.uk/ Informed the deliberations of the Research Support Libraries Group http://www.rslg.ac.ukhttp://www.rslg.ac.uk Input into CC-Interop

3. UKNUC testing & observation Reported in New Review of Information and Library Research, vol. 7, 2001, pp. 27–45. Undertaken in early-2001 Issues considered: de-duplication; handling of search results (including large result sets); interface design; bibliographic data and record supply; holdings and circulation data; performance and accuracy Z39.50 testing using Crossnet Systems ICONE client + hands-on, real-life, item searches

4. Z39.50 using ICONE client 10 systems tested: Z39.50 v2 supported by three systems and Z39.50 v3 by seven systems Search and present supported by all systems Scan support by six systems; Sort support by five systems Most systems behaved differently with regard to diagnostics Seriously questioned whether Z39.50 was actually an open, internationally-agreed standard

5. Comparison of search results Tested M25Link, RIDING, COPAC Author and title from a single book used as entry point in different combinations e.g. Au with initial; Au with first name; both of these combined with title, etc. Confirmed tremendous variability in the performance of servers and difficulty of building gateway systems for virtual catalogues Physical catalogue, COPAC, performed quickly and consistently

6. Bath Profile in UKNUC Variability of servers and inconsistency of searches emphasized need for consideration Timeframe: Bath v1.1 June 2000; UKNUC started May 2000 As many as possible system suppliers – 15 – in the UK were contacted by post in January 2001 and asked about their policies on Bath 7 responses: Support for Level 0 by end of 2001 Support for Level 1 to follow 1–2 years thereafter Suppliers adopting a wait and see attitude

7. Bath Profile in UKNUC ii I believe it is dangerous to build any model for the UKNUC on the assumption that all library vendors will implement the Bath Profile to a 100% compliance – response from one supplier reduced the wiggle room – comment from Carroll Lunau Libraries need educating as much as library suppliers (…must be Bath Profile compliant)