Thanks to Richard Amelung for his clarification - and for the OCLC
details which I found particularly interesting, since I have never tried
to use OCLC to ferret out active LC records.

But I think one should distinguish between our obligations as NACO
participants and the means by which we might achieve those obligations.

The obligations include searching proposed headings against "active" LC
records, and reporting any consequential BFM (I paraphrase, of course).

In order to achieve those obligations we have a number of databases we
might choose to search, including (but not necessarily limited to):
        RLIN
        OCLC
        LC
Note: any one of these options is perfectly ok. We are obligated to
search one such source, but we're allowed to choose which. Most folk,
for a variety of reasons, search for LC records in either RLIN or OCLC,
but it doesn't _have_ to be one or the other. Searching _only_ in LC is
equally acceptable. The point Jacqueline Jo Byrd was making was that for
those who chose to search on LC's own system as our database of
preference it was now quite a fiddle compiling a list of LCCNs, esp.
compared to LOCIS.

So, no, there's no obligation to search LC; but there is an obligation
to search one source of "active" LC records, and one of the options for
achieving that is to use LC itself rather than RLIN or OCLC. My point
was that this option was not well covered by the current documentation
for NACO participants. (The relevant section of the NACO Participant's
Manual is, unsurprisingly, in need of revision, as it's stuck in the
LOCIS era.)

Nancy Sack (Northwestern) pointed out that my previous reply took off at
a bit of a tangent from the original question - and I plead guilty. If
JJB was asking whether lists of LCCNs were still required - as opposed,
say, to simply reporting that all instances of heading X needed changing
to heading Y without indicating the specific records to which that
should apply - then I did indeed head off at a tangent. Personally, I
try to provide LCCNs unless the list is really substantial - simply as a
matter of courtesy to my Coop Team liaison who's every bit as overworked
as I am. Isn't sharing the burden what all of this is about? (Which
doesn't stop me hoping that we can find a quicker way once LC implements
global change capabilities in Voyager...)
--
Hugh Taylor
Head of Cataloguing, Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB3 9DR, England

email: [log in to unmask] fax: +44 (0)1223 339973
phone: +44 (0)1223 333069 (with voicemail) or
phone: +44 (0)1223 333000 (ask for pager 036)