maybe  something from you -
 I spoke with ana cristan in CPSO and they will consider adding an example or two for citing LAC especially since Appendix A: Canadian Headings will disappear from the DCM Z1 in August.  CPSO in consultation with LAC and the other national libraries have been working on removing exceptional practices from the DCM and the LAC requriments will be boiled down to a few paragraphs.  Coop currently is testing a Web form for requesting LAC verification of corporate names and that has worked out nicely ... stay tuned. 

>>> Antony Robert David Franks <[log in to unmask]> 7/2/2007 9:52 AM >>>
On the Coop Team, we have been promoting the idea that members should create proposals for broader terms for two main reasons:

1.  It helps further the cataloger's understanding of LCSH application beyond the mere creation of a single subjecr heading. Review of the heirarchical reference structure by a mentor or LC liaison can lead to a learning experience.

2.  It saves some time at this end. When we see that there is a proposal for that BT, we can concentrate on the content of the proposal rather than on whether or not the reference has been made. Coop is handling nearly four thousand SACO proposals each calendar year now, and every little bit helps.

Anthony

Anthony R.D. Franks
Team Leader, Cooperative Cataloging Team
Library of Congress
202-707-2822 (voice)
202-252-2082 (fax)

>>> "Moore, Richard" <[log in to unmask]> 07/02/07 8:50 AM >>>
It's been my understanding that we should submit SACO proposals for broader terms of the heading being proposed, when these are not already established. Has this changed? It's what we were trained to do when we started making SACO proposals, and we've been doing it for 12 years ...

Regards
Richard

_________________________
Richard Moore 
Authority Control Team Manager 
The British Library
                                                                        
Tel.: +44 (0)1937 546806                                
E-mail: [log in to unmask]