Is there a convention, written or otherwise, for citing PCC records in the
670 fields of NACO records? We have a new record a-borning that cites a
PCC record, & our best guess is:

        670 LC in OCLC, 2 July 1999 $b (hdg.: Blons-Pierre, Catherine)

Is "LC in OCLC" really accurate, or does it give a false impression?
Simply citing "OCLC" gives less authority than it ought to have.

Kay Guiles's July 1990 memo (Appendix IV in the NACO Participants'
Manual), which was for BFM purposes rather than citation practice,
certainly included NCCP records in this category:

  "Note that the phrase "LC cataloging" is used to refer to the following
  types of cataloging:

        1) cataloging done by LC itself;
        2) cataloging done by other agencies and libraries in association
        with LC through NACO;
        3) cataloging done by other agencies at the "LC level" and
        issued/distributed by LC (National Coordinated Cataloging Program; older
        cooperative cataloging; CONSER (certain levels of
        authentication));
        4) LC copy cataloging."

Also, I assume that if we call it "LC", we also follow the same protocol
for not repeating usage if it matches LC's heading form (also from NACO
Particip. Man.):

  A. If the heading on the LC bibliographic record(s) matches the usage on
  the work you are cataloging, generally consider the heading on the LC
  record to be AACR2 and do not examine or record the usage from the LC
  record. Use the heading from the LC record as the NACO heading.

How are other NACO libraries dealing with this?

____________________________________________________________________
Margaretta Yarborough [log in to unmask]
Monographic Cataloging
Davis Library CB# 3914
UNC-CH (919) 962-9693
Chapel Hill, NC 27514-8890 fax (919) 962-4450