On Wed, 22 Aug 2007, Boehr, Diane (NIH/NLM) [E] wrote:
> It is fine to convert NLM records.
> Diane Boehr
> Head, Cataloging Section
> National Library of Medicine
> 8600 Rockville Pike
> Bethesda, MD 20894
> 301-402-1211 (fax)
> [log in to unmask]
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Les Hawkins [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2007 1:56 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: questions about authenticating integrating resource records
> Hi Shana, these are good questions. Robert Bremer and I had a discussion
> about converting records a couple of weeks ago. I intended to send
> something out to the list about it before I left on vacation for two
> weeks but I didn't do that, sorry all!
> Here are some things from our conversation that relate to your
> questions, but I'll let Robert add any needed clarifications. There are
> also other comments of mine on things Robert and I didn't discuss. These
> questions are important to BIBCO members working with these records, so
> I'll copy the BIBCO list on this.
> 1. Since we announced the availability of converting and authenticating
> PCC records for integrating resources, several CONSER and BIBCO
> institutions have had various difficulties doing the conversion and
> authentication of existing "interim" bib level m records in a one step
> process. Other folks seemed not to have the difficulty at all or were
> able to work around it in a multiple step process. There were several
> variables related to the records themselves and perhaps the type of
> authorization that allowed it to work for some and not for others in the
> two programs.
> Robert made a good suggestion for simplifying at least the conversion
> end of it. We thought it might be a good idea for OCLC to go ahead and
> convert as many of thes (non-LC) interim bib level m records as soon as
> The "interim" practice records seem like good likely candidates for a
> first automated swipe since they are easily identified. Then,
> institutions would only need to deal with authenticating the records
> with 042 pcc and 010.
> Of those monograph records for integrating resources created before the
> interim practice, (this is just my opinion) there are probably some that
> can be more readily identified for conversion by machine than others.
> As for the question of CONSER authorizations being able to convert a
> "pre-interim" monograph records coded pcc, I think that may not be
> possible as our intention was to keep the BIBCO and the CONSER
> authorizations as distinct as possible as far as books and serials go,
> except for being able to mutually maintain records for integrating
> resources. But we'll need to let Robert comment on this because I am not
> 2. I was assuming it was ok for us to convert NLM records, but lets let
> NLM confirm this.
> 3. Changing records coded computer file: My first reaction is, I think
> if they are clearly language material and were clearly mis-coded its ok
> to change. But I think we ought to use some caution here, especially
> with those records that are already coded 042 pcc, that might have been
> coded or created by BIBCO members. I think that there might be some
> cases where one cataloger codes a resources as primarily computer file
> format, as an "online service" for example and another sees it as
> primarily language material. I mention this because there is such an
> example in the SCCTP workshop for integrating resouces, with the caution
> that some folks might see it one way and others another. So I think its
> worth discussing a bit more, what do others think? I think I'd prefer
> converting or simply accepting how another cataloger has coded the
> resource, especially if we know it might be viewed one way or another,
> rather than creating a duplicate in another format.
> 4. I think if you are converting records, they should be counted as
> existing records.
> On Wed, 22 Aug 2007, Shana L. McDanold wrote:
> > Good morning!
> > I need some clarification on a few issues that have come up that are
> > related to the authenticating of integrating resource records (adding
> > a LCCN and 042 pcc). I have a very talented intern that is working on
> > cataloging the plethora of databases we subscribe to. She has built
> > up quite the file of records that need updating for one reason or
> > another so the decision was made to go all out and authenticate the
> > records, complete with the necessary NACO work (she's getting a lot of
> > experience out of this internship).
> > *1.* What I understand is that if the interim practice was followed,
> > we can change the fixed fields in the record to convert the monograph
> > record to an integrating resource record (removing the serial 006
> > field in the process). My question is about those items that were
> > cataloged before the interim practice existed. There are many
> > integrating resource records out there that need updating (title
> > variations, etc.) but were done as monographs, with no 006 for the
> > serial aspects, but the 5xx notes make it clear that they are in fact
> > for what are now considered integrating resources. Can we changes
> > these monograph records to integrating resource records and
> > authenticate them? Or do we need to create a "new" integrating
> > resource record for them? I'd prefer to not create what I see as a
> > duplicate record just because they were pre-interim practice.
> > Ultimately, my concern is centered on changing the fixed field drop
> > down from "Books" to "Continuing Resources," will the system let us
> > (usually this is not allowed in OCLC unless you are creating a new
> > record)? And will it let us if the 006 for serials isn't present?
> > *2.* I know to exclude DLC records from the converting. Do we also
> > need to exclude NLM records?
> > *3.* Related to number one, what do we do with those items that were
> > done as "Computer Files" originally (due to old rules)? Can we
> > convert them to "Continuing Resources" or do we have to create a new
> > Again, these are resources that are clearly text-based integrating
> > resources like online databases.
> > *4.* This question is actually related to the CONSER statistics
> > form...would we consider these "authentications of existing records"?
> > Thanks!
> > --Shana
> > --
> > ----------
> > Shana L. McDanold
> > Electronic Resources & Serials Cataloging Librarian University of
> > Pennsylvania Libraries Van Pelt-Dietrich Library Center 3420 Walnut
> > Street Philadelphia, PA 19104-6206
> > phone: 215-746-0267
> > fax: 215-573-9610
> > e-mail: [log in to unmask]