Hmm. Interesting question.
This isn't quite the same thing as creating an SAR for printed CIP information where the series doesn't appear anywhere else on the published item, but I do know that SARs may be created from pre-publication CIP galleys (which is not the same thing as the data printed in the published book). As a CIP contributor I do create series authority records as part of the eCIP process based on the pre-publication eCIP galleys that come to me. I suppose LC-created CIP would be coded 490 0_ following their policy of not tracing series, so the issue wouldn't come up for them.
Like all sorts of other authority work based on CIP galleys (which exist before the actual publication comes out) it's subject to revision (or deletion if it never appears at all on the published item?--this isn't just a series issue, information about persons or other entities get authority data recorded from CIP pre-publication data, and sometimes that changes when the book actually gets published--the person's preferred name changes, or the person disappears altogether from the title page).
This isn't directly relevant to the question of what to do with information you find in printed CIP data on the verso of the title page of a published book. I believe the policy remains not to use it (the printed CIP data) to create an SAR (because the publisher may have decided not to create the series after all even though it had previously sent series information to LC with the CIP galleys and therefore might come back to them for printing on the title page verso). However, with current CIP there's a high likelihood that a 490 and possibly 8XX will appear in the CIP-created record for the book. I wonder whether, if the series does not appear on the actual published item (except in the CIP on the t.p. verso), we should actively remove the 490 from the CIP-created record? Perhaps so. I would be more hesitant to delete the SAR, particularly if there were other evidence for the series (like the publisher's website).
Robert L. Maxwell
Ancient Languages and Special Collections Librarian
6728 Harold B. Lee Library
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
"We should set an example for all the world, rather than confine ourselves to the course which has been heretofore pursued"--Eliza R. Snow, 1842.
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bryan Baldus
Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2015 10:13 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Series ARs based on CIP data alone
LC-PCC PS for 184.108.40.206 "Series Statement Present Only in Cataloging Data" says:
>LC practice/PCC practice: If the series statement appears only in pre-publication cataloging data (foreign or domestic) in the item, do not transcribe this information as a series statement.<
and LC-PCC PS for 220.127.116.11 says:
>LC practice/PCC practice: Apply these guidelines to both main series and subseries statements:
"Sources within the resource itself" include those with formal statements (such as on a back cover) or informal statements (such as within the text of a preface). "Sources within the resource itself" do not include pre-publication cataloging data (such as CIP data) printed in the resource; treat such data as a source outside the resource (see Policy Statement for 18.104.22.168).
Generally, prefer series statements from other sources outside the resource (such as a publisher website) over information from CIP data. Enclose a series statement taken from outside the resource (including one from CIP data) in square brackets. If considered important for identification, explain in a note the source of the series statement (see RDA 2.17.11).<
Page 37 of Session 6b of the NACO series training  mentions that "there is an outstanding policy issue concerning whether series numbering that appears only in CIP data or on a publisher's website should be recorded in the series AAP."
My question concerns the AAP itself when the series statement appears only in CIP data (and/or only on a source outside the resource, like the publisher's website). Under previous practice, I believed we did not create series authority records in those cases (nor did we include series statements). Is this still the case? If so, should SARs based on CIP data alone be reported for deletion (or modified to reflect statements on the piece, outside the CIP data, if the 1xx is currently based on CIP)?
SAR no2015006367 (Harbo, Christopher L.$tEdge books.$pOrigami paperpalooza):
Our copy of Origami papertainment matches the situation described in the 670--"Edge books" on the title page (and cover), "Origami paperpalooza" appears only in the CIP data. The back cover has "Books in this set", but no other series statement. So, should SAR no2015006367 be deleted, and 490 "$aEdge books", 830 "$aEdge books (Series) (Capstone Press)" (no2014015038) be the only series elements included in the record for Origami papertainment?
SAR no2015021879 (Nonfiction picture books.$pAnimal heroes):
We no longer have access to our copy of Scarlett the cat to the rescue, but looking at the Google preview , "Nonfiction picture books. Animal heroes" is in the CIP data, but otherwise there doesn't appear to be a series statement. Our copy of Sgt. Reckless, the war horse matched the Google preview , with "Nonfiction picture books. Animal heroes" in the CIP on page 32, and "Animal heroes series" above the series listing, also on page 32. So, should no2015021879 be revised to "Animal heroes (Picture Window Books (Firm))" (our copies gave the publisher's name statement as "Picture Window Books, a Capstone imprint") or "Animal heroes series", with optional bracketed 490 added to Scarlett the cat to the rescue and other titles where the statement is given only in the CIP?
Thank you for your assistance,
Quality Books Inc.
The Best of America's Independent Presses
[log in to unmask]