    |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Recommendations for Interlibrary Loan Response CodesThe problemWhere interlibrary loan requests cannot be satisfied immediately by the supplying library, a response is required in order to inform the requesting library of the reason for non-supply. Often, the responding library uses a set of standardised responses consisting of phrases or comments written in their own language. Many different sets of responses are in use around the world, and the same response may be written in many different ways, and of course in many different languages. The use of different languages or even alphabets can result in the requesting library not being able to understand the response given. It is important that the requesting library fully understands the reason for non-supply, and the use of coded replies not based on natural language is one way in which the language barrier can be overcome. The solutionThe IFLA Office for Universal Availability of Publications (UAP) and International Lending was asked to create a comprehensive list of responses which might be given in response to interlibrary loan requests. A code, not reliant on natural language, would then be assigned to each response, in order that they are understood by all and used internationally. The use of a single list of codes will help to overcome the language barrier to effective interlending and document supply. To create the comprehensive list, existing response codes were studied and compared, and the opinions of interlibrary loan librarians sought and analysed. There was a good response from colleagues worldwide with very useful and relevant information coming from the USA, UK, Estonia, Macedonia, Sweden, Denmark and Russia. The response codes used by the British Library Document Supply Centre and the ISO ILL Protocol were also consulted. When the different response code lists were compared it became apparent that many of the responses were common to them all, although they may be expressed differently. Some codes used are unique especially if the library using them specialises in certain materials. ConclusionThe IFLA list of recommended response codes for interlibrary loans has 28 responses which will allow libraries to communicate their information in a precise and standard format. The plan now is to offer the list of response codes in many different languages, beginning with the five IFLA languages. We would be delighted to hear from anyone who is able to translate the list of coded responses into their own language, in order to extend the usefulness of the list, and to support effective international interlibrary loan. Comments or feedback on the use of the IFLA List of Response Codes should be sent to ifla@bl.uk. The CodesTo view a complete list of the ILL Response Codes in another language, please click on one of the languages listed here. To obtain a translation of one of the numeric codes, please click on the code in the English table below. TranslationsUNDER CONSTRUCTION
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
