LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for EDUCAT Archives


EDUCAT Archives

EDUCAT Archives


EDUCAT@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

EDUCAT Home

EDUCAT Home

EDUCAT  July 2008

EDUCAT July 2008

Subject:

Re: Teaching 440 obsolete, use 490/830

From:

Deborah Fritz <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

[log in to unmask]

Date:

Fri, 11 Jul 2008 09:18:28 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (172 lines)

Good morning Constanta,

I can assure you that your English is very much better than my Romanian :-)

Yes, the values for the indicators in certain MARC21 fields are designed to
be very important for information retrieval. 

For example, the 'Non-filing characters' indicator values in the 245 and 440
are meant to provide indexing instructions that tell a library automation
system how many characters of the title to skip before beginning to file or
index that title in a 'browse' index. This allows an indexing module to skip
initial articles in a title, such as "The", "An", "A", "Al", "O", "Un",
"Unei", "Unui", etc., so that the title can be searched by the first word
following the initial article.

As another example, the "Title added entry" indicator values in the 245 and
the "Note/added entry controller" values in the 246 are designed to control
whether or not the titles in those fields are indexed.

Other indicator values, are designed to affect displays instead of
retrieval, e.g., in the 505, 520, 521 fields.

You are correct that some library automation systems ignore these
indicators, but the indexing and displays in most of the MARC21-based
library automation systems can be set up by individual libraries to
correctly use the indicator values in the ways that they are designed to be
used.

We definitely teach our workshop students about the proper use of all
indicator values, in the hope that they will return to their libraries and
make certain that the indicators are being imput properly in their catalog
records and used properly by their library automation systems.

Regards,

Deborah

P.S. A few weeks ago, I was teaching 2 of my workshops not very far away
from you, in Kaunas, Lithuania; for LABT a Consortium of libraries that are
switching to using AACR2 and MARC21. It was a wonderful experience and the
Lithuanian librarians that I met were very impressive (and very nice)

------
Deborah Fritz
MARC Database Consultant
The MARC of Quality
www.marcofquality.com
Voice/Fax: (321) 676-1904
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Discussion List for issues related to cataloging & 
> metadata education & training [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On 
> Behalf Of Constanat Dumitrasconiu
> Sent: Friday, July 11, 2008 1:32 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [eduCAT] Teaching 440 obsolete, use 490/830
> 
> Good morning!
> 
> I am Constanta Dumitrasconiu and I am chief of Cataloguing 
> Dept. from Central University Library of Bucarest, Roumanie. 
> I am associate professor at University of Bucarest. I pursue 
> with  interest all the discussions from educat list because 
> at my faculty (Librarianship and Information Science) teach a 
> MARC format - UNIMARC.
> If you allow me, I would want to ask you if the values of 
> indicators are very important, for your programms, in 
> information retrieval?
> I  saw that some programms find the informations even if they 
> not assign correct the values of the indicators.
> 
> Excuse-me, please, for my audacity to ask you and excuse-me, 
> please, for my poor English!
> 
> Thank you very much,
> _____________________________________
> Constanta Dumitrasconiu
> Central University Library of Bucharest, Romania Cataloguing 
> Department
> 1 Boteanu Street, 010027, Bucharest
> Phone: 312 0661/244
> E-mail : [log in to unmask]
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Deborah Fritz" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2008 9:21 PM
> Subject: [eduCAT] Teaching 440 obsolete, use 490/830
> 
> 
> It is my understanding that MARC Proposal No. 2008-07 was passed, to:
> - Make Field 440 obsolete
> - In field 490, redefine the first indicator value "1" to 
> "Series traced in
> 8XX field."
> 
> Offically, this does not take effect until the next MARC 
> Update comes out
> (which might be in Oct, or will be sometime thereafter); however, I
> understand that a number of catalogers have stated their intention of
> immediately ceasing to use 440 and beginning to use 490 1/830 
> for series
> statements/series added entries.
> 
> This means that records will soon start appearing on OCLC and in Web
> accessible catalogs with a 490 series statement traced the 
> same as the 830
> series added entry, possibly causing some copy catalogers who 
> are possibly
> less in-the-know than those of us keeping up with the latest
> cataloging 'gossip' to wonder what is going on. But this is 
> just an aside,
> not my main concern.
> 
> We, at TMQ, welcome this change and believe it will be 
> considerably less
> difficult to teach series treatment done this way. However, 
> it has always
> been our policy to only teach concepts when we can point to 
> some official
> (or at least semi-official, or at the very least somewhat reputable)
> readily available instructions or guidelines for reference.
> 
> As far as I can gather, the only 'official' announcement 
> regarding this
> change in procedure will be the MARC Update and the 
> subsequent change to
> the MARC21 Format manual, in Oct or later. (Might there be an 
> LCRI, even
> though LC no longer makes series added entries?)
> 
> So my question is whether we should wait until the 'official' 
> announcement
> has been made before teaching the new series treatment, or 
> begin teaching
> it immediately?
> 
> We will be teaching 19 workshops before the end of Oct that 
> are affected to
> a small or large degree by this change.
> 
> What are all you other Educatters doing?
> 
> Thanks,
> Deborah
> 
> Deborah Fritz
> The MARC of Quality
> [log in to unmask]
> www.marcofquality.com
> 
> 
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of 
> virus signature database 3259 (20080710) __________
> 
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
> 
> http://www.eset.com
> 
> 
 

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 3259 (20080710) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com
 

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

November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
July 2020
June 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
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
March 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
June 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
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
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
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
December 2007
November 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
April 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager