Celine is asking a good question. We also need to know how LC records are
going to be coded. Technically, the ones with series cannot be PCC records
given existing PCC standards and LC's new practice. I honestly don't know
who decides this or how. But no matter what is decided, we need to know.
Does the PCC have a role in sorting this out? LC does begin implementation
We have lots of automated processing going on here that is looking for
encoding levels and such. What are we going to have to reprogram?
Regardless of how libraries decide to treat LC records with series, they
do need to know how to identify them.
Diana Brooking (206) 543-8405
Cataloging Librarian (206) 685-8782 fax
Suzzallo Library [log in to unmask]
University of Washington
Seattle WA 98195-2900
On Thu, 25 May 2006, Celine Noel wrote:
> For those of us in the trenches, I want to be clear that I understand how
> series differences will operate under the PCC umbrella beginning next week on
> June 1.
> Below is the Core record policy on series for Books:
> 4XX (Series statement)
> 35) Transcribe all series as found on an item in either a 490 or a
> 440 field. All traced series must be supported by a national level
> authority record. Untraced series need not be supported by a
> national level authority record. *If a national level series
> authority record already exists for the series, follow the first
> tracing practice indicated on the record and record the series and
> tracing appropriately (i.e., in a 490 field, a 440 field or a
> 490/8XX pairing)*
> (my emphasis)
> If this policy remains in place, this means that LC and other
> libraries that no longer consult the national authority file for series
> practice will no
> longer be able to contribute records to the Bibco program or label them
> "PCC". Right?
> Celine Noel
> UNC-Chapel Hill
> Mark Watson wrote:
>> "The Program for Cooperative Cataloging is an international cooperative
>> effort aimed at expanding access to library collections by providing
>> timely, and cost-effective cataloging that meets mutually-accepted
>> of libraries around the world."
>> The Program for Cooperative Cataloging (PCC) has been and continues to be a
>> successful and dynamic program. Its achievements are based on the
>> voluntary cooperation of member libraries that range from small to large to
>> very large, including the Library of Congress. All of these libraries
>> to adhere to established standards when creating records that will be
>> stamped with the imprimatur of the PCC. While each member library is
>> expected to meet a certain threshold of production each year, there is no
>> expectation that every record produced will conform to PCC standards. This
>> is a vital and important point. Each PCC library is accorded the freedom
>> and the right to determine its own internal policies and procedures and the
>> level to which its total cataloging output will conform to PCC conventions.
>> There is nothing in the PCC guidelines to abrogate a member's flexibility
>> contribute nationally as well as to accommodate local needs and practices.
>> In recognition of this fundamental aspect of PCC participation, the PCC
>> Policy Committee (PoCo) formally recognizes and supports the right of the
>> Library of Congress (LC) to make cataloging decisions in its own best
>> interest. In this regard, PoCo is treating LC the same as it would any
>> other member library and is unwilling to take a stand against LC's decision
>> to discontinue series authority control. Taking this position may sound
>> strange to some given the consternation expressed by segments of the
>> community; however, the stance makes sense given the type of organization
>> that PCC strives to be. Were a poll to be conducted, it would not be
>> surprising to find nearly as many different opinions about the series
>> decision as there are PCC trained catalogers. Therefore, if consensus
>> exists, it does so only on the point that all PCC members participate at a
>> level that works for them.
>> That said it is impossible to ignore the fact that this particular change
>> LC cataloging policy has widespread ramifications-especially in a context
>> where, until now, there has been a one-to-one correspondence between LC and
>> PCC standards. Over the past several weeks, many thoughtful documents
>> detailed the potential impacts of the decision, sparking debate about
>> end-user interest in controlled series access, the cost/benefit of
>> it, the amount of additional effort that may be required to perform series
>> work that LC will no longer be doing as well as developing policy and
>> maintaining needed documentation. These are issues that will continue to
>> engage the PCC and the bibliographic community at large for some time to
>> come. Several meetings at the upcoming ALA Annual Conference in New
>> Orleans-the ALCTS Forum on the Library of Congress Series Authority Record
>> Decision (Friday, 6/23, 4:00 p.m.) and the PCC Participants Meeting
>> 6/25, 4:00 p.m.), will be devoted to continuing the dialogue on these
>> For the moment, PoCo wants to make it clear that PCC series policy remains
>> unchanged. Member libraries that believe value is derived from series
>> authority control are encouraged to continue this work in accordance with
>> established guidelines and procedures. The Policy and Operations groups,
>> along with the three standing committees, will continue to work together
>> with the PCC Steering Committee, including the Library of Congress as it
>> executes its role as the PCC Secretariat, in order to facilitate this
>> transition to a future without LC series control.
>> Submitted by Mark R. Watson, Policy Committee Chair, 2005/06 on behalf of
>> PoCo([log in to unmask]).