why would a pcc record require a new naco record?
i had thought that the primary defining feature of a
pcc record was that all authority work had been accomplished.
A. Ralph Papakhian, Indiana University Music Library
Bloomington, IN 47405 812/855-2970 [log in to unmask]
co-owner: [log in to unmask]
On Fri, 9 Jul 1999, Margaretta Yarborough wrote:
> 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
> 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