Yes, we have long been aware of the problem but can't seem to find a way around
the need for the precise formatting required. I will refer this to the SCA for
consideration, maybe there is something or someone out there that can create a form
that can be filled in, transmitted to LC and then printed out here in the correct
format (without extra handling in the Coop Team), etc.
Pat Williams wrote:
> The answer to question 9 in the FAQ still requires that proposals for
> cutter numbers be faxed to SACO. This is very inconvenient for some of us
> and it would be easier to have the option of using a web form or at least
> an email form instead. Has there been any consideration of using either of
> these forms of communication for class no. proposals?
> Pat Williams
> University of Chicago Library
> At 06:46 PM 8/6/02 -0400, you wrote:
> >The LC Classification for BIBCO libraries FAQ
> >http://www.loc.gov/catdir/pcc/bibco/classfaq.html has been updated in response
> >to a question posed by a BIBCO participant.
> >The question asked if alternative classification numbers should be supplied in
> >BIBCO records when cataloging "bound-withs." The Standing Committee on
> >Standards has provided clarification on the BIBCO policy on when to supply
> >alternative classification numbers and that response has now been incorporated
> >into the FAQ questions 5 and 6.
> >Sincere appreciation to the SCS for their cogent and very helpful guidance.
> >Ana Lupe Cristán
> >Acting Team Leader/BIBCO Coordinator
> >Cooperative Cataloging Team
> >Library of Congress, LM 537
> >Washington, DC 20540-4382
> >tel: 202.707.7921
> >fax: 202.252.2082
> >e-mail: [log in to unmask]
Ana Lupe Cristán
Acting Team Leader/BIBCO Coordinator
Cooperative Cataloging Team
Library of Congress, LM 537
Washington, DC 20540-4382
e-mail: [log in to unmask]