LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for PCCLIST Archives


PCCLIST Archives

PCCLIST Archives


[email protected]


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

PCCLIST Home

PCCLIST Home

PCCLIST  June 2006

PCCLIST June 2006

Subject:

Re: Follow-up: Re: Answering: CONSER standards and LC series policy

From:

Judith A Kuhagen <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 1 Jun 2006 14:54:34 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (168 lines)

Paul,
	I didn't say it would be changed without PCC approval.  Modification of CONSER documentation (and other PCC documentation)is always done via a consultative process with PCC participants.
			Judy


>>> [log in to unmask] 06/01/06 2:23 PM >>>
As I see it, the intellectual property in the CONSER documentation 
"belongs" to PCC, not LC. Therefore, it is inappropriate for LC to be 
changing it without PCC approval.

Paul

At 2006/06/01 09:44 a, you wrote:
>Kevin,
>         As I noted in earlier reply, the CONSER documentation will 
> be reviewed and updated this summer.  Les and Hien will be 
> discussing with CONSER participants.
>                         Judy
>
>
> >>> "Kevin M. Randall" <[log in to unmask]> 06/01/06 11:29 AM >>>
>Judy:  Thank you for your explanations.  However, they do not seem to
>correspond with the policies as described in the CONSER Editing Guide, as I
>understand them.
>
>In CEG B6.2, "Description of record levels", the 8XX Series added entries
>are described as "MA" under Full, Core, and Minimal levels.  "MA" means
>"mandatory if applicable".
>
>In C2.4, "Summary guidelines", under C2.4.1, "Full or core level cataloging
>is being performed", it includes:
>1) Assumptions:
>a. Records will contain all necessary fields required for a full level
>record as stated in the CEG
>b. Records will contain all necessary name/series headings
>c. Name/series headings are or will be established in the Name Authority
>File (042 = lcd), or not established but in AACR2 form (042 = msc); or no
>headings required (042 = lcd)
>Similarly, under C2.4.2, "Minimal level cataloging is being performed", it
>includes:
>1) Assumptions
>a. Records will contain all necessary fields required for a minimal level
>record as stated in the CEG.
>b. Record may or may not contain name/series headings.
>c. Name/series headings used may be established in Name Authority File (042
>= lcd) or not established but in AACR2 form (042 = msc); or no headings
>(042 = lcd).
>
>In Section E, "MARC 21 Format for Serials as Applied Within CONSER", under
>"042 Authentication Code", the definition for codes commonly found in
>CONSER records are:
>lc: Code "lc" signifies that descriptive elements and headings are verified
>by the Library of Congress. LC authenticates records for items held that
>are not within the purview of the Library and Archives Canada.
>Additionally, the Library of Congress adds LC-specific elements to records
>for Canadian imprints that are part of its collection. Beginning in Oct.
>2004, LC uses code "lc" to authenticate original records only.
>lcd: Code "lcd" signifies that descriptive elements are verified by NSDP or
>other CONSER members and that all name and series headings appear in the
>NAMES file. Older records may also have been verified by NST and the CONSER
>Minimal Level Cataloging Section at LC. Code "lcd" is also used when all
>descriptive elements have been verified and there are no headings
>appropriate to the record. (See also no. 4 and no. 5 under Updating
>authenticated records below.)
>msc: Code "msc" signifies that descriptive elements are verified by LC or a
>CONSER member, including U.S. Newspaper Program participants. All headings
>have been checked against the name authority file, but an authority record
>was not found for one or more headings. Code "msc" is used by NSDP in all
>prepub records because headings are not checked in these records.
>All of the above taken together seem to make it clear (to me, at least)
>that it is CONSER policy generally to trace series, and it is *not* an
>option in an authenticated CONSER record to not trace a series that is
>already established with a policy of "trace".  Even in a minimal level
>record, if a series is already established it must be traced in the form
>given in the SAR.
>
>The idea that a CONSER member could contribute a full level record with the
>series statement in 490 0 simply because they aren't contributing an SAR is
>a huge surprise to me.  (If that was just some historical practice, it is
>not mentioned in CEG.)
>
>LC's general policy of non-tracing series, *especially* in a cooperative
>program, is very much counter to the spirit of the program.  In CEG B1.5,
>"Level of records", it states:
>CONSER records are created at the full, core, or minimal level as specified
>in B6.  CONSER records may be created at any level but most CONSER records
>should be created at at least the core level. The creation of full level
>records is encouraged, as resources permit. Minimal level records are
>generally limited to specific groups of serials that don't warrant higher
>level analysis.
>And in CEG B1.8, "International resource record", it states:
>Bibliographic information given in a CONSER record is a composite of all
>known information about a serial. This  information does not necessarily
>reflect the holdings of any one institution. In addition, CONSER records
>are created so that they may be used universally. Policies and practices
>specific to one institution are not applied to CONSER records, nor is
>information given that is purely local in nature.
>--Kevin
>
>At 08:08 AM 6/1/2006, Judith A Kuhagen wrote:
> >[Because Kevin sent message to both PCC and CONSER lists, I'm replying to
> >both as well. - Judy]
> >
> >Kevin,
> >         Remember that 490 0# is not a heading; the "lc" authentication
> > code for serials applies to headings.  There have always been some series
> > untraced by LC and others (began before 1989 when all new series became
> > traced) in which serial analytics were published; those CONSER records by
> > LC and others have always been coded "lc" if the name headings in records
> > were supported by authority records.
> >         Also, not all CONSER members originally contributed SARs.  If
> > they didn't, they coded their serial analytic records as "lc" either
> > because they gave the series statements as 490 0# fields or because they
> > requested LC to make the SARs for them.
> >         Les and Hien will be updating the CONSER documentation to remove
> > LC practice statements for series, etc., over the next months.
> >                         Judy
> >
> >
> > >>> [log in to unmask] 05/31/06 6:55 PM >>>
> >It is minimally reassuring that LC will not be inputting the "pcc" code in
> >field 042 of monograph records for items in series.
> >
> >However, according to the FAQ and the instructions for LC staff that I have
> >seen, the code "lc" will still be used in field 042 of serial records, even
> >when series are not being traced.  Also, 490 0 will be used if a
> >change/addition of series occurs on a CONSER record that is being modified
> >by LC.
> >
> >Despite the assurance by Mark Watson in his 5/25/06 message that "PCC
> >series policy remains unchanged," LC is unilaterally deciding not to follow
> >fully the standards that are established for CONSER records.  And while
> >"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," and "PoCo is treating LC the same as it would any other member
> >library," it is not at all clear that LC has the right to impose those
> >decisions on a cooperative database.  If any other CONSER member library
> >were to institute such a policy, and submit/modify records that fail to
> >meet the mutually agreed upon standards of the program, I seriously doubt
> >that it would be looked upon so favorably by PoCo.
> >
> >The procedures that LC has put in place for their new series policy will
> >immediately call into question any CONSER record involving a series that
> >has "DLC" in the 040 field and a create or modify date after 6/1/06.  Most
> >of us probably have our own "blacklists" of OCLC member libraries whose
> >copy needs very careful review before being used.  But it is very sad
> >indeed to now find it necessary to add some CONSER records into 
> that category.
> >
> >Kevin M. Randall
> >Head of Serials Cataloging
> >Northwestern University Library
> >1970 Campus Drive
> >Evanston, IL  60208-2300
> >email: [log in to unmask] 
> >phone: (847) 491-2939
> >fax:   (847) 491-4345


_______________________________________
Paul J. Weiss
Catalog Librarian and NACO Coordinator
Metadata Services Department
UCSD Libraries
858-534-3537
[log in to unmask] 
_______________________________________

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998
February 1998
January 1998
December 1997
November 1997
October 1997

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager