Only a couple of libraries appear in the 040 field, and one of them at least is a batch loader.

Since the record (now) appears to be DLC DLC enc lvl blank, probably very few pairs of actual human cataloger eyes have looked carefully at this record. We for one have automated quick cataloging workflows that pull in records that appear to the machine to be "complete".  We don't have the bandwidth to examine and correct every record that goes through our shop.  I assume others are in a similar position. 


Diana Brooking
Catalog/Germanics Librarian
University of Washington Libraries
Box 352900
Seattle WA 98195
206-685-0389
[log in to unmask]


-----Original Message-----
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Yang Wang
Sent: Friday, July 13, 2018 7:30 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Updating UT/expression language authorities

I was just curious and did a quick search (by combining “& [name of a language]” in uniform title with “rda” as a keyword) in our local database. I found quite a few such headings indeed. Apparently it’s not just that some catalogers are re-using old headings, but that they continue creating new ones. 

 

Here’s an example: (OCoLC)890792787. It has been updated several times since 2014. There are 100 holding institutions in GLIMIR cluster. The authorized access point itself is not established, clearly, but the fact that the mistake is there, having escaped the notice of so many pairs of eyes, is little short of embarrassing. 

 

Yang

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Robert M. TALBOTT
Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2018 7:14 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [PCCLIST] Updating UT/expression language authorities

 

Hello folks:

 

I've been seeing a lot of RDA records with 130 [title].$l [language 1] & [language 2] authorities attached of late.  I can't tell you how sad this makes me.

 

My sense of the matter of updating these records is to create a new authority for each language if it doesn't yet exist in the AF, and request cancellation of original.  Is this correct?

 

I looked high and low for official documentation, and the closest I came was a PCC list thread from 2013, which confirmed my assumption, but the smart money says, "Ask first, then do the work."


 

Cheers

 

Bob

-- 

Bob Talbott

Principal cataloger/Hebraica cataloger

UC Berkeley

250 Moffitt

Berkeley, CA 94720

If they're too small for court, they're probably shorts.

If they're long and advanced, you're looking at pants