LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for BIBCO Archives


BIBCO Archives

BIBCO Archives


BIBCO@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

BIBCO Home

BIBCO Home

BIBCO  August 2007

BIBCO August 2007

Subject:

Re: questions about authenticating integrating resource records (fwd)

From:

Les Hawkins <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Wed, 22 Aug 2007 13:55:42 -0400

Content-Type:

TEXT/PLAIN

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

TEXT/PLAIN (124 lines)

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 possible.

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
sure.

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.

--Les

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 record?  
> 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]
> 

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

August 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
November 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
January 2017
December 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 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
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
September 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
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
May 2004
March 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
April 2003
March 2003
January 2003
December 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
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
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager