Adam et al.: good point; we'll ignore the existence of the PCC record and
create the simple AR without it.  And then let the other library know it
was missing (the bib record went in in late January, so the lag time
theory had already been shot down).  As a NACO manager, I too would like
to know when our PCC records lack corresponding ARs, but when it's a
straightforward case like this, it seems much easier and more economical
for all involved to go ahead and make the NACO record, then notify.  Of
course, if we had any quarrel with the heading form, we'd refer it back to
the BIBCO record's originating library beforehand.

Thanks to all who commented.  It's time on the East Coast to put this one
on ice (if there's any left over from our current heat wave).

mjy
____________________________________________________________________
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

On Fri, 9 Jul 1999, Adam Schiff wrote:

> Since the book in hand matches the record in OCLC, I would totally ignore
> the existence of the record in OCLC and just establish the heading based
> on what was in hand and on any other records for other works found in
> OCLC.  The heading you come up with by doing this should be identical in
> most cases to the heading that the other library would have come up with
> by following the same practice.  So the existence of the PCC record for
> the same book doesn't really provide you with any new information.
>
> As the NACO manager, however, I would like to be notified if some of our
> BIBCO records lack corresponding authority records.
>
>
> **************************************
> * Adam L. Schiff                     *
> * Principal Cataloger                *
> * University of Washington Libraries *
> * Box 352900                         *
> * Seattle, WA 98195-2900             *
> * (206) 543-8409                     *
> * (206) 685-8782 fax                 *
> * [log in to unmask]           *
> **************************************
>
> On Fri, 9 Jul 1999, Margaretta Yarborough wrote:
>
> > In this instance, it was simply the omission of a NACO record; we weren't
> > disagreeing with the heading form.  It was simpler to go ahead and supply
> > a straightforward AR, until we ran into the citation problem.  The whole
> > thing has been an illustration of "no good deed goes unpunished!"
> >
> > mjy
> > ____________________________________________________________________
> > 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
> >
> > On Fri, 9 Jul 1999, Martin Joachim wrote:
> >
> > > Jain is absolutely right.  I have frequently referred problems back to the
> > > originating libraries, and I certainly want to know when someone finds a
> > > problem with any of our BIBCO or NACO records.  Also, if I change a NACO
> > > heading for some reason (a valid reason, of course), I attempt to inform
> > > the library that originally created the record.  I have also had other
> > > libraries ask my permission to change NACO headings created by us. I don't
> > > particularly think that it's necessary to ask permission to change a
> > > record for a valid reason, but I don't mind when someone does ask.  I'd
> > > just like to be informed of the change.
> > >
> > >        IIIIII
> > >          II             Marty Joachim
> > >      UU  II  UU         Principal Cataloger
> > >      UU  II  UU         Indiana University Libraries
> > >      UU  II  UU         Bloomington, IN 47405
> > >      UU  II  UU         [log in to unmask]
> > >       UUUIIUUU          (812) 855-4263
> > >          II             FAX (812) 855-7933
> > >        IIIIII
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, 9 Jul 1999, JAIN FLETCHER wrote:
> > >
> > > > Margaretta,
> > > >    Agreed, point well taken, etc.  I would also hope that this
> > > > situation simply does not arise again.  But I would just like to
> > > > suggest a possible different approach to this: rather than ignore the
> > > > existence of the PCC record, contact the PCC liaison at the institution
> > > > (from the 040 of the bib record) and (somehow nicely) request that they
> > > > finish the work that they started...  Neither your institution nor any
> > > > other should take up the slack for this "unfinished business" (IMO).
> > > >                   --Jain Fletcher, UCLA
> >
>
>