Kate and others,
While I'd love to see expedited creation of SACO proposals in OCLC, I think we should also thank the folks at LC who are getting proposed headings into http://authorities.loc.gov within a day or two or three of submission. At least we have a chance of finding the proposed heading in one of our commonly-available environments.
Building the topical hierarchies is an editorial process. Categories need to be analyzed for adherence of precedence, procedures, and policies. Perhaps a way can be found to fast-track headings of named instances, e.g., buildings, imaginary cities, cartoon characters, pets and other animals, types of cars.
New York University Libraries
[log in to unmask]
----- Original Message -----
From: Kate Harcourt <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Monday, December 22, 2008 10:00 am
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Reminder: check LC Authorities for proposed subjects
To: [log in to unmask]
> This exchange from Adam reminds me that there had been an agreement to
> move SACO record creation to OCLC. Most of this mess would have been
> avoided if a record had been in the national authority file as quickly
> we are able to create name authority records. I'm really curious where
> are in that transition? This has also come up as a concern in the
> Implementation Task Group on the LCWG Report of which I am the chair.
> The lengthy SACO review process is seen as a barrier to the efficient
> sharing of bibliographic and authorities metadata.
> Best wishes for the holidays to all!
> On Mon, 22 Dec 2008, Antony Robert David Franks wrote:
> > Adam has come across a situation that has bedevilled us from the
> beginning of BIBCO. Once a record is sent forth into the world, any
> one with the appropriate authorization can do any thing to it--whether
> or not they're a PCC member.
> > Several years ago, there was a lengthy diatribe on Autocat about the
> poor quality of BIBCO records. Most of the records singled out for
> public dissection were from one member institution. The institution
> investigated the matter thoroughly and responded, in effect, that the
> original records in their local file were correct and had none of the
> faults singled out in the Autocat posting. The records had all been
> changed (mostly for the worse) since distribution.
> > As long as local catalogers cannot help themselves but revise,
> change, improve, or adapt to local practice, we'll have this.
> >>>> "Adam L. Schiff" <[log in to unmask]> 12/19/2008 8:13 PM >>>
> > This is an interesting situation that is worth some discussion. On
> > November 12, we upgraded a record in OCLC to PCC status, and as part
> > that we made a SACO subject proposal and a SACO classification proposal.
> > The record in question is OCLC 268662166. The title of the work is:
> > Capture-based aquaculture : global overview
> > We made a subject proposal to establish "Capture-based aquaculture"
> and at
> > the same time we proposed a new class number for this subject (SH137.33).
> > The proposals were approved on weekly list 50 and the subject authority
> > record was added to OCLC on Dec. 11.
> > Subsequent to our authenticating this record as a BIBCO record, another
> > PCC library changed the subject heading to "Cage aquaculture". I'm
> > sure which library did this, because there are four PCC library codes
> > after ours in the 040 of the record. I assume that whoever made this
> > change did so because they didn't find the heading Capture-based
> > aquaculture in the OCLC authority file. It was still working its way
> > through the proposal/editorial process at LC. If the cataloger who
> > changed the heading to a much less specific or appropriate heading had
> > checked the LC Authorities web site (http://authorities.loc.gov/) they
> > would have seen that the subject heading on the record had been proposed
> > through SACO. They should not have altered it on the BIBCO record.
> > So... it would be good to remind all catalogers that if a record is
> > authenticated as a PCC record and they don't find a subject heading
> > classification number that is on that record in the OCLC authority
> file or
> > on Classification Web, it's almost certainly because the heading or
> > has been submitted through SACO. They can check on proposed
> subjects by
> > looking in Library of Congress Authorities.
> > I've changed the subject heading on OCLC #268662166 back to what it
> > and should be: Capture-based aquaculture.
> > It also strikes me as odd that someone modified the 530 note that we
> > on the record from "Also issued electronically via World Wide Web in
> > format" (which is text that comes right out of AACR2) to the much less
> > specific "Also issued online". It's not clear to me why a cataloger
> > change that note on a BIBCO record.
> > Happy Holidays everyone,
> > Adam Schiff
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > Adam L. Schiff
> > Principal Cataloger
> > University of Washington Libraries
> > Box 352900
> > Seattle, WA 98195-2900
> > (206) 543-8409
> > (206) 685-8782 fax
> > [log in to unmask]
> > http://faculty.washington.edu/~aschiff
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Kate Harcourt
> Director, Original and Special Materials Cataloging
> 102 Butler Library
> Columbia University Libraries
> phone: 212.854.2714
> fax: 212.854.5167