I agree with John Schalow. Even with trained catalogers, accuracy is
often a problem. Also within an institution, it is much easier to
communicate with one another on changes and updates in practices.

Accountability for NACO records is very important. I can see the
possibility of independent BIBCO participants without involvement in
creation of new NACO records - I guess this will have problem in
authorization.

Margaret Shen


js368 wrote:
>
> Dear Ana and others:
>   The advantage of what we are doing now is that there is accountability at
> an institutional level.  I recently received an error report from OCLC
> about a PCC record we had input where another institution was requesting
> several rather substantive changes.  OCLC wanted us to check the book and we
> did and the result was corrections to the record (hate to admit this!).  But
> the system works!!  If we adopt a model which includes independent
> catalogers (maybe by applying the funnel project model), we still need to
> maintain accountability and a contact person who will take responsibility
> for resolving problems and evaluating whether additional training is
> needed.   -John Schalow
>
> >Dear Kate, et al.
> >   Traditionally NACO participation has been institution based because
> >of the commitment to the initial 5-day training and because LC provides
> >free documentation to NACO institutions to assure compliance with the
> >most current policies and procedures (MARC 21 format and all updates,
> >(including the DCM Z1 yellow pages--which are not available from CDS)
> >and the LCRIs and its updates).
> >   Perhaps rather than individual membership the model to be followed
> >here should be a Funnel project.  Some of the Funnel Projects are
> >comprised of single individuals from institutions, usually from a
> >specialized branch library, where the general library may not belong to
> >NACO.  Perhaps Bob (or Norine) would like to consider becoming the
> >Funnel Coordinator for a General NACO Funnel Project (GenNACO??).
> >   At ALA we heard from a retired NACO cataloger who is now working
> >free-lance and from an active cataloger who moved from a NACO to a
> >non-NACO institution both expressing the desire to continue NACO
> >participation.
> >   We'd be interested in hearing more discussion on this before taking
> >the question of individual PCC membership to the PoCo for consideration.
> >
> >Ana Cristan
> >Cooperative Cataloging Team
> >Library of Congress
> >e-mail: [log in to unmask]
> >phone: 202.707.7921
> >fax: 202.707.2824
> >
> >Kate Harcourt wrote:
> >>
> >> I think it is a good idea.  My only question/concern would be one of
> >> logistics.  The new institution may not be an OCLC enhance library, thus
> >> limiting participation.  Also some of us might question the pcc marker in
> >> a record that does not have a participating library MARC21 symbol in the
> >> 040.
> >>
> >> Kate
> >>
> >> On Wed, 19 Jan 2000, Vicenti, Norine Isidora wrote:
> >>
> >> > That would be a good idea.  What if a former institutional cataloger
> became
> >> > an independent cataloger?  If that person has present NACO contributing
> >> > status, why not continue that status as a stand-alone if  so desired.?
> >> >
> >> > Thanks Robert for the suggestion.
> >> >
> >> > Norine Vicenti  (BYU alumni)
> >> > Joint Bank-Fund Libary
> >> >
> >> > > -----Original Message-----
> >> > > From: Robert Maxwell
> >> > > Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2000 7:03 PM
> >> > > To:   [log in to unmask]
> >> > > Subject:      "Independent" pcc members
> >> > >
> >> > > PCC members:
> >> > >
> >> > > I was struck at Midwinter by the number of my cataloging colleagues who
> >> > > have become what I will call "PCC orphans" by changing jobs, becoming
> >> > > employed by a library that is not an institutional NACO/BIBCO member. I
> >> > > think as the years pass the number of such catalogers will grow. It
> seems
> >> > > to me we are losing a rich resource by abandoning these experienced PCC
> >> > > catalogers, many of whom would like to continue contributing. Would it
> be
> >> > > possible to establish a category of "independent" or "personal"
> membership
> >> > > that would allow those who have been contributors to the program at
> their
> >> > > original institution continue to contribute even if their current
> >> > > institution does not participate?
> >> > >
> >> > > Bob Maxwell
> >> > > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> >> > > Robert L. Maxwell
> >> > > Special Collections and Ancient Languages Cataloger
> >> > > 6428 Harold B. Lee Library
> >> > > Brigham Young University
> >> > > Provo, UT 84602
> >> > > (801) 378-5568
> >> > > [log in to unmask]
> >> > > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> >> >
>
> John Schalow, Head, Cataloging Dept., McKeldin Library
> University of Maryland, College Park, MD., 20742
> Email:[log in to unmask]
> Phone: 301-405-9320  Fax: 301-314-9971

--
************************************************************************
   Margaret Shen
   Head, Catalog Dept.                     email: [log in to unmask]
   Cleveland Public Library            voice: (216) 623-2886
   17133 Lake Shore Blvd.              fax:   (216) 623-6980
   Cleveland, OH 44110
************************************************************************