LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for PCCLIST Archives


PCCLIST Archives

PCCLIST Archives


PCCLIST@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

PCCLIST Home

PCCLIST Home

PCCLIST  December 2016

PCCLIST December 2016

Subject:

Re: Authority updates and BFM

From:

Christopher Thomas <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Wed, 21 Dec 2016 21:52:15 +0000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (1 lines)

It's not just about correcting errors and validating headings, it's also about cataloger judgment.  We sometimes come across works on legal topics which are not classed in K and don't have legal subject headings.  That may be okay for a general library, but a law library is going to want to have legal aspects brought out.  Also, I am amazed to see PCC records come through where the K tables have been applied incorrectly.

It's great to edit OCLC master records when you can rather than just editing your local record, but many edits you would make in your local database would not be appropriate for a master record.  For example, we locally delete 533, 538, and 583 from provider neutral electronic resource records because these notes do not apply to the resources we are cataloging.  However, we can't delete them from the master records, because annoyingly the Provider Neutral standard allows for inclusion of this data which is not provider neutral.

Christopher Thomas, M.L.S.| Electronic Resources and Metadata Librarian
(949) 824-7681 | fax (949) 824-6700 | [log in to unmask]
LAW LIBRARY · UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA · IRVINE
www.law.uci.edu/library

-----Original Message-----
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Amy Turner
Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2016 8:32 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Authority updates and BFM

Thanks, Jenifer.  I was indeed envisioning a beautiful database resulting from more efficient methods of pooling our expertise.  While some libraries have unique needs, so much work that we all need to do is repeated in many libraries.

The goal of cooperative cataloging has been stated as creating records that can be used by many libraries.  However, records are not static, and I wish that we could expand our cooperation to maintaining a bibliographic file jointly, as we maintain the LCNAF.

At Duke, at one time we made many local edits outside of OCLC.  Since 2004, we have followed the general rule that if an edit is worth making locally, it is worth making in OCLC.  But this is for current cataloging only.  While some records on OCLC benefit from much work by many libraries, others have headings that were once valid, but no longer match the LCNAF, not to mention other outdated practices and outright errors.  With somewhat different policies and better automation, OCLC could be a lot cleaner, to the benefit of all.

Amy

-----Original Message-----
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jenifer K Marquardt
Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2016 10:11 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Authority updates and BFM

Good morning,



In the past, we have made lots of local edits outside of OCLC, especially with our music cataloging.  Now we are moving to Alma and looking at getting updates of records from OCLC and of doing all of our copy cataloging work directly in OCLC.  I'm rather alarmed at the idea of losing all of our past enhancements, and I definitely understand that all cataloging records are not created equal!



But I think that Amy wasn't expounding a one record fits all even if the record is junk.  I'm sure she was envisioning a database of beautiful records created with all of the expertise available.  It certainly is a lovely vision! :-)



Jenifer



Jenifer K. Marquardt

Asst. Head of Cataloging & Authorities Librarian

University of Georgia

Athens, GA 30602-1641



________________________________________

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Phyllis Jones [[log in to unmask]]

Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2016 11:24 AM

To: [log in to unmask]

Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Authority updates and BFM



I would like to echo Christopher Thomas's comment, this time from a music library perspective. We live in an era where "good enough" is often the standard to which we are expected to work -- and I certainly understand that many of us are laboring under straitened circumstances in terms of staff resources -- but I for one am on the side of resisting whenever possible the pull toward a downwardly-mobile catalog. The single authority file with which most of us work remains a more or less "artisanal" province, accounting for its general reliability. Unfortunately the same can't be said for most shared catalogs, which bring together the excellent, the good enough, and the just plain bad. Local control is indeed a necessity for specialized collections (law, music, etc.) and could be considered a plus in many other libraries as well.



-Phyllis Jones



On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 10:39 AM, Christopher Thomas <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:

This “one size fits all” mentality doesn’t work well for special libraries.  In a law library, we frequently deal with cooperative cataloging copy created by people who do not understand legal literature.  We won’t just accept whatever junk comes down the pike, and we need to have control over our own data.



Christopher Thomas, M.L.S.| Electronic Resources and Metadata Librarian

(949) 824-7681<tel:(949)%20824-7681> | fax (949) 824-6700<tel:(949)%20824-6700> | [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>

Law Library · University of California · Irvine

www.law.uci.edu/library<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.law.uci.edu_library&d=CwIGaQ&c=imBPVzF25OnBgGmVOlcsiEgHoG1i6YHLR0Sj_gZ4adc&r=Dc2zJWQZhGVM4krkr2m4NTiSqZ5Ld3IvJ8wM_1HzJMc&m=t6cSfCfK_89Ogx41rGfaCAkZ79oseUiKmEFRj_HGohQ&s=0AiUrWdgRntJxSxtVXUx6axkYRZDf0bPz8sKfv45XeY&e= >



From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On Behalf Of Amy Turner

Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2016 6:59 AM



To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>

Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Authority updates and BFM



Wouldn’t it be great if there was just one cooperatively maintained bibliographic file, just as there is one cooperatively maintained authority file, and BFM done for one library (with a snazzy automated system) would be done for all?



Peace on Earth, good will to men,



Amy



From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of McDonald, Stephen

Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2016 9:50 AM

To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>

Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Authority updates and BFM



Ack—my apologies.  It was not Mary Jane that actually asked the question.  It was Charles.



                                                            Steve McDonald

                                                            Cataloging and Metadata Librarian

                                                            [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>



From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of McDonald, Stephen

Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2016 9:47 AM

To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>

Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Authority updates and BFM



It is a fair question, Mary Jane.  For you and for many libraries, the file maintenance is not a burden.  Some systems would handle it entirely in the background with no intervention by staff.  However, there are libraries where file maintenance is a much bigger deal.  For some libraries, this change would have to be done by hand.



In general, a single change is not much work for one library.  But we have to remember that every AAP change we make incurs file maintenance for tens of thousands of libraries.  So we have to strike a balance between creating the best records and creating unnecessary work.



Ultimately, the decision on where to set the dividing line between necessary and unnecessary changes is somewhat arbitrary.  To build consistency and make the decision easy, PCC has established policy.  They could have decided to make the dividing line elsewhere; indeed, under old policy, even adding death dates to existing birth dates was often considered excessive file maintenance.  The policy may change again in the future, and under a linked data scheme it may be unnecessary to construct AAPs at all.  But for now, the policy is that we should not add birth dates to an established heading unless it is also necessary to make another change to the heading.



                                                            Steve McDonald

                                                            Cataloging and Metadata Librarian

                                                            [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>



From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Cuneo, Mary Jane

Sent: Monday, December 19, 2016 7:52 PM

To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>

Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Authority updates and BFM



I’ll get in trouble for saying this, but so what?  The file maintenance is not an unbearable burden.



Hi Charles,

Not unbearable, but a great pain in the rear, & time that could be spent doing more useful things.  (From someone who, with colleagues, gets a report every month and slogs through it).



Mary Jane Cuneo

Senior Serials Cataloger & NACO coordinator

Harvard Library



From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Herrold, Charles

Sent: Monday, December 19, 2016 11:47 AM

To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>

Subject: Re: Authority updates and BFM



    I’ll get in trouble for saying this, but so what?  The file maintenance is not an unbearable burden.

    However, before anyone goes off the rails, I will also say that John is right, of course, as the name is unique and doesn’t need dates.  The only serious objection I have is that, incredibly, LC provided no justification in the record for the death date:



010  n  84216417

040  DLC ǂb eng ǂe rda ǂc DLC ǂd DLC

046  ǂf 1917-02-06 ǂg 2016-12-18

1001 Gabor, Zsa Zsa, ǂd 1917-2016

370  Budapest (Hungary) ǂb Los Angeles (Calif.) ǂ2 naf

374  Actors ǂa Socialites ǂ2 lcsh

375  female

4001 Gábor, Sári, ǂd 1917-2016

4001 Gábor, Zsa Zsa ǂw nne

670  Such devoted sisters, 1985: ǂb CIP galley (Zsa Zsa Gábor)

670  Filmgoers companion, 1977 ǂb (Zsa Zsa Gábor; b. 1919 [sic])

670  LC data base, 9/10/84 ǂb (hdg.: Gábor, Zsa Zsa)

670  IMDb, May 9, 2008 ǂb (Zsa Zsa Gabor; b. Feb. 6, 1917, Budapest, Austria-Hungary; birth name: Sári Gábor; unclear as to Zsa Zsa's birth date)



      Maybe the LC cataloger should just add that essential information and remove the dates from the access points.



Chuck Herrold

Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh







From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Hostage

Sent: Monday, December 19, 2016 11:32 AM

To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>

Subject: [PCCLIST] Authority updates and BFM



Zsa Zsa Gabor was laid to rest in the authority file last night.  The access point that previously had no dates now has birth and death dates.  Why?



------------------------------------------

John Hostage

Senior Continuing Resources Cataloger

Harvard Library--Information and Technical Services

Langdell Hall 194

Harvard Law School Library

Cambridge, MA 02138

[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>

+(1)(617) 495-3974<tel:(617)%20495-3974> (voice)

+(1)(617) 496-4409<tel:(617)%20496-4409> (fax)

ISNI 0000 0000 4028 0917









--

Phyllis J. Jones

Senior Recordings Cataloger

Conservatory Library

Oberlin College

Oberlin, OH 44074

Phone: 440/775-5137



Email:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[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

May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 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
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 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
August 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
October 2009
September 2009
August 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
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
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
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 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
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998
February 1998
January 1998
December 1997
November 1997
October 1997

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager