LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for MARC Archives


MARC Archives

MARC Archives


[email protected]


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

MARC Home

MARC Home

MARC  December 1997

MARC December 1997

Subject:

Fields 505 and 856

From:

account for net dev and marc <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

USMARC <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 10 Dec 1997 13:52:57 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (185 lines)

USMARC subscribers might be interested in this message forwarded from the
AUTOCAT list.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
[log in to unmask] wrote:
>
> Catalogers ...
> Yesterday we ran across something we had never seen before in an OCLC
> record ... #32822869, Mimbres mogollon archaeology.  It has an 856 with a
> URL for a table of contents on lcweb
> (http://lcweb.loc.gov/catdir/toc/95-4395.html).
> Is this something LC is doing on a routine basis?  I couldn't see anything
> on the main catdir page that explained the project.
> I tried searching Autocat archives to see if this had been mentioned before.
> Could someone please enlighten me?
> Thanks much!
> Margo
> *************************
>
> Margo Warner Curl
> Technical Services Librarian
> The College of Wooster Libraries
> phone: 330/263-2154
> fax: 330/263-2253


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

Date:    Tue, 9 Dec 1997 13:37:56 -0500
From:    David Williamson <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: LC TOC explanation (long)

     I wanted to respond to the discussion regarding tables of contents
showing up either in 505 fields or else by a link in the 856 field.  LC
has several projects going on involving TOC, and I have written to AUTOCAT
about some of them in the past.  This work is growing, both here at LC and
among other institutions and vendors such as OCLC, WLN, Yankee Book
Peddler, BNA, and others.  I want to summarize our projects, offer a few
thoughts, and ask a few questions.  If you respond to anything contained
here, please send me a copy at my personal address ([log in to unmask]) as I
usually only have time to skim AUTOCAT these days.  Also, as usual, I am
not conveying official LC policy here, just my views based on the work I
am doing in this area.
     The first TOC project we have is the one that initiated the message
by Margo Curl.  This is the Electronic CIP Experiment.  The experiment
began in November 1993 with the first electronic manuscript submitted for
cataloging.  This was just an ASCII text of the paper book to be published
(as are all E-CIPs). Since that time, we have received over 2500
manuscripts for electronic processing.  You can read about the mechanics
of E-CIP processing in CCQ (Vol. 22, No. 3/4, 1996, pp. 179-196) or
chapter 9 of _Planning and Implementing Technical Services Workstations_,
edited by Michael Kaplan, ALA Publications, c1997.  Almost since the
beginning, we have been including the TOC information in the 505 field
when possible.  There are 2 criteria:
1. Does the TOC provide useful information (good search terms, good
contents indication, access to individual articles, etc.)?
2. Can this data be manipulated quickly (5 minutes maximum) and easily
into something the E-CIP cataloging program can manipulate into a 505
field?
     If the answer is yes, then the data are added in the 505 field.  If
not, the TOC is ignored.  At the moment, we are processing about 1000
E-CIPs per year in the experimental mode.  We are providing 505 access to
TOC data for about half of these items.  The other half are not worth 505
fields (TOCs for novels) or are complex TOCs that would require more than
5 minutes to edit into a useable form.  Also, LC is not using the enhanced
505 for monograph cataloging at the moment.
     It became evident that we were losing some good TOC information with
complex TOCs.  A method was developed to take this TOC information from
the E-CIP manuscript, wrap minimal HTML coding around it, save it to the
WWW server, and add the 856 field to the catalog record.  This required
only a few clicks of the mouse and only a few seconds to accomplish.  This
is the type of TOC information found by Margo Curl.
     A few points related to this TOC project:
1. Contents notes are not normally given for monographs.  However, if the
data are available electronically and if these data can be manipulated by
a program into a 505 field or into a WWW file with a link, shouldn't they
be provided as an enhancement to the record?
2. Normally, 505 fields are not provided for contents with more than 10 or
so elements.  Again, if the data are available and can be quickly
manipulated, we will provide it (chapter titles only) with E-CIPs even if
more than 10 elements are present.
3. Since there is no rekeying, it is faster and more accurate and thus
worth the effort.
4. When E-CIP goes into production (hopefully early 1998), the number of
records with 505s or 856s will definitely increase as this becomes our
primary source for TOC/record enhancement data for monographs.
     Now let's get into the 505/856 debate.  I think many of us agree that
TOC information can be very helpful to the user in determining if a
particular book is of interest.  I have explained the parameters for 505
fields in the E-CIP record.  What if the TOC is complex but has a lot of
very useful information?  Should it just be ignored?   Should we not
create the WWW file and link with the 856?  This is a real question I
would like your opinion about (to my email address: [log in to unmask]).
Whenever I demonstrate the 505/856 TOC work we are doing, people always
say they would prefer the 505 (as do I) but within the parameters we have
to work with, the 856 link is better than nothing, isn't it?
     That's how our 856 TOC link came about.  If you want to try a quick
demo of how it can be used, go to http://lcweb.loc.gov/z3950, go to
"Search Library of Congress Catalog" and select "Simple Search (title or
personal name)".  Enter 2 words in the box: GLOBALIZATION HASSAN (not in
caps) and click on the search button.  You'll get a brief record for the
book with a link to the TOC.  While this is not the MUMS search system
(which is not Internet aware), this search system is used by many people
around the world as is the Experimental Search System, both of which are
Internet aware and will automatically link the TOC for the user, so that
the user does not need to start other software or go somewhere else to
access the TOC information.
     There are two other projects involving TOC data and 856 fields that I
want to mention quickly.  The first is to buy TOC data from a vendor.  In
my research into how we will deal with vendor supplied TOC data, I have
found that this TOC data tends to be unsuitable for 505 use (not the
enhanced 505, remember).  There are 2 problems:
1. Some might be OK for a 505, some not.  We need an automatic way to
determine this and so far I can't find a way without involving a
human--not good.  With shrinking staff, fewer funds, etc., this must be an
automatic process.
2. Since we are not using the enhanced 505 (not for me to decide or debate
here), we would only record chapter titles in the 505.  In the TOC data I
have seen, it is not possible to determine chapter titles from section
titles from part titles without human intervention.  The MARC-like coding
I have seen used in vendor TOC files tends to use a hierarchy but does not
establish a base level for the hierarchy.  In one TOC record, the chapter
titles are the first level in the hierarchy.  In another, they are the
third level behind part titles and section titles.  Again, this has to be
an automatic process.
     The second project is just getting underway and shows promise.  Under
the auspices of our Bibliographic Enrichment Advisory Team (BEAT) which
was started with a grant from the Edward Lowe Foundation, we are
experimenting with scanning TOCs from books already published in business
& economics.  What we are doing is photocopying the TOC, adding the LC
card number to the top of the page, scanning it in a batch mode, and
running the TOCs through character recognition (which adds a hard page
break between each TOC to separate them).  After that, the TOCs are run
through a program which "reads" the LC card number, opens up the
bibliographic record, and adds the 856.  What the program then does is
snag the first subject heading from the record, adds the subject heading
in the metadata keyword field, wraps HTML around the TOC data, and saves
the TOC file to the WWW server.  The technician is still learning the
process but can do 7 per hour (photocopying, scanning, everything) and is
getting better.  It is hoped to get up to 10 per hour.  So far about
100-150 are done and if we can get this up to 10 per hour, we'll expand
out into other areas.  Reports will be presented in issues of LCCN.
     In this last project, why are we using subject headings in the
metadata tag?  As part of an experiment to see if it is useful to have
people lead into the catalog from the Internet search engines.  Do the
same "GLOBALIZATION HASSAN" search on Yahoo.  Yahoo will pass it off to
Alta Vista.  When you see the response from Alta Vista, look what is the
first hit--the LC TOC WWW file.  When you click on it, you go to the TOC
file on the WWW.  If the TOC looks interesting, you can click on the two
buttons at the top of the screen, one for the Z3950 search you did earlier
and one that does the same search in the Experimental Search System.  If
you go to the ESS, you see that many of the elements of the OPAC display
are hotlinked.  Want to see more by this author?  Click on his name.  Want
to see more on this subject matter?  Click on the subject heading.  So,
with this, we are hoping that by using the controlled vocabulary from the
subject headings, if users happen to use those terms in a search engine,
the TOC files will be found and hopefully brought higher up the search
results list.  If that actually happens remains to be seen, but if so, we
can then lead the user into the catalog and to the bibliographic record in
ways we couldn't before.  So now we can take people from the catalog out
and from outside the catalog in.
     Will all of this be of any use?  You tell me (another real question I
am asking).  We are experimenting with new ways and methods not tried
before now (that we know of).  With OPACs becoming Internet aware and all
of the electronic resources out there that need organizing, I am hoping
that these techniques will help us deal with them and get ourselves in
shape for whatever is the next step.  I hope this explains a lot about
those TOC records and why we are doing them.  Please write me if you have
any further questions.

David Williamson

|=====================================|
|                                     |
|  David Williamson                   |
|  Cataloging Automation Specialist   |
|  Cataloging Directorate             |
|  Library of Congress                |
|  Washington, D.C. 20540-4300        |
|  202.707.5179 (voice)               |
|  202.707.2824 (fax)                 |
|  [log in to unmask]             Team OS/2 |
|                                     |
|=====================================|

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

March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
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
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 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
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
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
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 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
September 1997
August 1997
July 1997
June 1997
May 1997
April 1997
March 1997
February 1997
January 1997
December 1996
November 1996
October 1996
September 1996
August 1996
July 1996
June 1996
May 1996
April 1996
March 1996
February 1996
January 1996

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager