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.
>>> [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.
At 2006/06/01 09:44 a, you wrote:
> 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.
> >>> "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
>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:
>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
>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
>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.
>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]
> > 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
[log in to unmask]