Comment Details - National Information Standards Organization

#00126 Comment Details - RP-12-201x_Physical Delivery_draft_for_public_comment_final.pdf

Document Information
Title	NISO RP-12-201x, Physical Delivery of Library Resources (draft for public comment)
File Name	RP-12-201x_Physical Delivery_draft_for_public_comment_final.pdf	State	Final
Date Added	2011-07-07 13:54:17	Revision Number	0
Submitter Name	Cynthia Hodgson	Size	908K

Comment Information
Summary	eliminate routing slip when possible	State (Disposition)	New (Unresolved)
Date Added	2011-07-11 07:40:13	Last Updated	2011-07-11 07:40:13
Submitter Name	Lori Ayre	Assigned To	Unassigned
Company Name	The Galecia Group	Response	None
Interest Category		Category	N/A
Origin	Public Review	Section, Page, Line	Section 4.1
Item		Item Description

Submitter Comment
You mention using the SIP2 connection for sorting but you never address sorting without routing slips in the Item Labeling section. This is one of the big benefits of sorting using the connection to the ILS (again, or sorting on the RFID tag - someday). I recommend you add information here about eliminating routing slips altogether and how that is done. One way is to let the outbound library toss the item in any bin and let the central sort use a SIP2 connection to sort out the items. Under this scenario you can separate items more granularly than "by library" to avoid routing slips, or reduce the number of items that need routing slips, on the receiving side. One example would be to separate returns (from holds and media or anything that requires additional staff handling). If you did this you'd also have to identify the "return bins" by color or perhaps a single bin label. This, by the way, is another benefit of using the smaller totes. With smaller totes, you can sort more granularly and still fill the tote. So if you have automated your sort and are sorting via SIP2 (or the RFID tag - which could indicate the destination and sort type [e.g. "return"]), it will be easier to reduce labeling (just label the bin) or eliminate labeling (let bin color determine whats inside).

Submitter Comment

You mention using the SIP2 connection for sorting but you never address sorting without routing slips in the Item Labeling section. This is one of the big benefits of sorting using the connection to the ILS (again, or sorting on the RFID tag - someday).

I recommend you add information here about eliminating routing slips altogether and how that is done. One way is to let the outbound library toss the item in any bin and let the central sort use a SIP2 connection to sort out the items.

Under this scenario you can separate items more granularly than "by library" to avoid routing slips, or reduce the number of items that need routing slips, on the receiving side. One example would be to separate returns (from holds and media or anything that requires additional staff handling). If you did this you'd also have to identify the "return bins" by color or perhaps a single bin label.

This, by the way, is another benefit of using the smaller totes. With smaller totes, you can sort more granularly and still fill the tote. So if you have automated your sort and are sorting via SIP2 (or the RFID tag - which could indicate the destination and sort type [e.g. "return"]), it will be easier to reduce labeling (just label the bin) or eliminate labeling (let bin color determine whats inside).