> Dear BIBCO participants:
> One of the questions put to me at the BIBCO participants meeting in
> May concerned OCLC replace transactions.
> Specifically, when an OCLC member locks and then replaces a record to
> upgrade it or to enrich it, that replace transaction places a copy of
> the record on the member library's OCLC MARC subscription (whether
> that subscription is tape or electronic). Libraries generally must
> subsequently update or produce the same record with local information,
> in order to set holdings in WorldCat. Update and produce transactions
> also place a copy of the record on the MARC subscription.
> I was asked if OCLC could eliminate placing the replace transaction in
> MARC subscriptions, as that transaction essentially is useless to
> libraries and generally causes duplicate record processing for local
> systems. I thought this was a grand idea. The reason that
> transaction is supplied to libraries as part of MARC subscriptions is
> lost in OCLC history somewhere. After some discussion here at OCLC,
> it was agreed to work toward eliminating replace transactions from
> MARC subscriptions.
> This has been placed on the plan, or list of programming changes that
> we want to make. However, many other things previously placed on the
> list have higher priority, so it may take a number of years before the
> result we want is realized. Specifically, as you know, Y2K work is
> taking priority at OCLC at the present.
> But, I wanted to communicate this to you, to let everyone know that
> your ideas have been heard and will, eventually, be acted upon.
> If anyone has any questions about this, please let me know.
> Cynthia M. Whitacre
> OCLC Representative to BIBCO Operations Committee
> Manager, Technical Processing Dept.
> 800-848-5878, ext. 6183
> [log in to unmask]