When a data element is on the "pass through" list as part of copy cataloging, etc., that data element is not reviewed, modified, or deleted by anyone at LC. It "goes out" in the same form as it "came in." So, 4XX/8XX fields that may be incorrect in fact, form, or MARC tag will be "passed through" as found. (Not sure what part of my previous reply made you think we would adjust the 4XX/8XX fields; the answer to your last question was about descriptive data elements when LC is giving the series as a 490 0#.)
>>> "Adam L. Schiff" <[log in to unmask]> 05/31/06 6:22 PM >>>
Another question that I have for you is about the "pass through" of series
statements coded as 440 or 490 1/8XX. Will LC staff be checking that the
4XX recorded in a record used for lccopycat is transcribed correctly and
will they correct those that are not transcribed correctly? I have
unfortunately come across numerous records in OCLC that contain 440s of
440 _0 Occasional paper (Ahmadu Bello University. Dept. of Geography)
where it is clear that the cataloger that contributed the record doesn't
understand the difference between transcribing the series as it appears
and providing a controlled series title access point.
My assumption based on your previous message is that LC staff will take an
incorrect series statement such as the example above and change it to just
a 490 0 with the series transcribed correctly (but not converting the
incorrect 440 to an 8XX). Is this assumption correct?
Adam L. Schiff
University of Washington Libraries
Seattle, WA 98195-2900
(206) 685-8782 fax
[log in to unmask]
On Wed, 31 May 2006, Judith A Kuhagen wrote:
> Adam and Antony,
> I'm pre-empting Antony in replying now. See responses preceded by "JAK" in the message below.
>>>> [log in to unmask] 05/31/06 3:05 PM >>>
> Some comments and questions based on the revised PCC series FAQ and the
> announcement you forwarded:
> In the series FAQ it says:
> "The code pcc in field 042 will no longer be used in LC original core
> cataloging (040 $a is solely DLC and Enc/lvl is 4); such records in a CIP
> state (Enc/lvl is 8) are assumed to be done at core level, the default
> cataloging level at LC.
> The code pcc will continue to be used in CIP-partnered core cataloging
> (040 $a is XXX/DLC; XXX = partner's code) for those partners who choose to
> continue to provide controlled series access."
> Am I understanding this correctly to mean that for publications that are
> not in any series (i.e. no 4XX at all needs to be transcribed) that even
> these records will not be coded as PCC records from LC? I had assumed
> that it would only be the records with series that wouldn't be coded pcc
> from LC. If all access points on a bibliographic record created by LC are
> under authority control, why isn't LC contributing these as PCC records?
> JAK: The management decision was that "pcc" wouldn't be used in any monograph core records so that catalogers would be doing the same thing in all monograph records. (Note: LC has never used "pcc" in its full level records.)
> My other question was raised on this list earlier, but still isn't
> answered by the documentation that I've seen: in the 490 0's that LC does
> transcribe, will the ISSN ($x) also be transcribed in the field if present
> on the item?
> JAK: The ISSN is a descriptive element. There is no change in transcribing descriptive elements: title proper, parallel titles, other title information, statement of responsibility, ISSN, numbering. What is changing is the tag for the 4XX field.
> Thanks very much,
> * Adam L. Schiff *
> * Principal Cataloger *
> * University of Washington Libraries *
> * Box 352900 *
> * Seattle, WA 98195-2900 *
> * (206) 543-8409 *
> * (206) 685-8782 fax *
> * [log in to unmask] *