LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for PCCLIST Archives


PCCLIST Archives

PCCLIST Archives


PCCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


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  February 2007

PCCLIST February 2007

Subject:

Series question

From:

Renette Davis <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 11:33:40 -0600

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (109 lines)

We have been discussing on the CONSER list some questions which came up at 
Midwinter regarding cataloging for the Registry of Digital Masters. For 
those of you who did not attend the digital registry meetings at Midwinter, 
a summary is available at:

http://www.lib.uchicago.edu/~rd13/CIC/Summary.html

One of the questions is whether a series which applies only to the 
electronic version can be added to the print version record when using a 
single record approach. Since this applies to monographs as much as 
(probably more so than) serials, I am interested in hearing the views of 
monographic catalogers on this matter.

Even if you are not involved in digitizing resources at your library, or 
are not involved in getting records for those digitized resources into the 
Registry of Digital Masters, the digital registry record IS the WorldCat 
record, so it's possible you may be using those records.

The DLF Registry of Digital Masters Record Creation Guidelines recommend 
"that a separate record be created for each manifestation when physical 
formats and system requirements differ from the original form of an 
item/object." The CONSER group is also recommending that the separate 
record approach be used for serials in the digital registry. With serials, 
if one institution which uses a separate record approach digitizes some 
volumes of a title, they will put the information about those volumes on 
the electronic version record, and then if another institution which uses a 
single record approach digitizes other volumes of the same title, they will 
put the information about those volumes on the print version record. 
Therefore, no one record will contain information about all of the 
digitized volumes.

However, there are some institutions which are committed to using the 
single record approach and would not be able to contribute records to the 
digital registry if single records were not allowed. The feeling is that it 
would be better for people to have to look at two records to get all of the 
information about volumes that have been digitized than not to have some of 
the information available at all. Therefore, CONSER (and the DLF Registry 
of Digital Masters Working Group) also supports the option of a single 
record approach.

The issue which we are dealing with now has to do with adding a series 
which applies only to the electronic version to the print version record 
when using the single record approach.  There are some CONSER members who 
feel that it's ok to add such a series in subfield f of the 533, but it 
should not be added as an 8XX to the print version record. There are others 
who feel that it is important to provide an added entry for the series.

An example of a series which applies only to the electronic version is 
Cornell University Library historical math monographs. There are at least 2 
records in OCLC for the collection - OCLC #54958588 as BLvl i and #81483580 
as BLvl m. There is a series authority record - ARN 05482924, 010 
no2001037016, established by the University of Washington.

Our math bibliographer asked us to catalog the website and all of the 
monographs on the website. We had most of the monographs in print, so we 
just added a 530 note, an 856, and an 830 for the series. (The 
bibliographer specifically asked us to provide access by the series for these.)

When we have the print version, we normally do not update OCLC, except for 
things which we digitize here, so you can't see any of the single records 
in OCLC, but if you go to our online catalog at http://libcat.uchicago.edu/ 
and select series under "Begins with" and then type Cornell University 
Library historical math monographs in the box below that, you will get the 
records. Clicking on one of the titles will give you the full record and 
then clicking on the link will give you the document.

You can see that Cornell University Library historical math monographs 
(actually a variation of that) appears at the top of each of the individual 
monographs. When I asked about providing access to the name a digital 
collection during one of the RDA discussions, Adam Schiff said that he was 
told by LC that if the name of the collection appears in conjunction with 
all of the digital objects, it can be considered a series.

At the University of Chicago Library, some of our digital collections can 
be considered a series because the name of the collection appears in 
conjunction with all of the digital objects. We use a single record 
approach here, so we add the URL to the print version record in our local 
catalog (and for things that we digitize at the University of Chicago to 
the record in OCLC.) We have been asked by the group which coordinates the 
creation of digital collections here to add the series as well as the URL 
to the print version records but we will not be able to add it to the OCLC 
records if an 8XX which applies only to the electronic version is not 
allowed on a print version record. These will be digital registry records.

So the questions for this group are:

1. Is it important to provide access by a series which applies only to the 
electronic version?

2. If it is important, is it ok to add an 8XX to the print version record 
if using a single record approach?

3. If we define a $5 to the 8XX fields (as we just did for 533 and 538), 
would that make it more acceptable to add an 8XX for the series that 
applies only to the electronic version to the print version record?

4. If it's important to provide access by the series, but not ok to add an 
8XX to the print version record, is there any other way to do it? We have 
discussed adding it in a 7XX as the name of a collection, but my guess is 
that those who oppose adding an 8XX that applies only to the electronic 
version to a print version record would also oppose adding a 7XX that 
applies only to the electronic version to the print version record. I think 
it's a given that some institutions will continue to use the single record 
approach.

Thanks,

Renette

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

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