LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for BIBCO Archives


BIBCO Archives

BIBCO Archives


BIBCO@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


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

BIBCO Home

BIBCO Home

BIBCO  October 1999

BIBCO October 1999

Subject:

Upgrading pre-AACR2 records at LC

From:

Ana Cristan <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Fri, 8 Oct 1999 10:02:44 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (116 lines)

This is being posted in response to Jennifer Bowen's query: Bib. records
with pre-AACR2 description, posted on Sept. 22nd

*********************************************************************
        LC Bibliographic Records That Reflect a Mixture of Practice

BACKGROUND

LC has several million retrospective records in machine-readable form
(PREMARC records) that reflect pre-AACR2 cataloging conventions (both
description and access).  Because of the manner in which the records
were created, they reflect various kinds of problems, including those
of  incompleteness and incorrect content designation.  The heading
structure is generally in tact, but it reflects pre-AACR2 forms of names
and series and older subject heading practice.  Until recent
installation of the LC Integrated Library System (LC ILS), these records
were in a separate physical file and were not taken into account in
daily cataloging activity.  In general, we have not attempted
systematically to upgrade PREMARC records, although many corrections
have been made to individual records, particularly to correct errors in
content designation.  The one exception has been records for incomplete
multipart items.   We wanted such records to be part of the "current"
catalog so that additional volumes could be readily added as they were
received.  We therefore developed guidelines for upgrading such records
and making them part of  the files that, under our previous system,
constituted our current catalog.  We also applied these guidelines in
those cases in which records did not get created in the initial PREMARC
conversion.

GUIDELINES FOR UPGRADING pre-AACR2 RECORDS

"New input" is the term we use for converting an existing manual
cataloging record into machine-readable form or for upgrading an
existing PREMARC record with respect to completeness (in relation to the
original source card) and access points.  Because we do not have, in
general, the resources  to recatalog in each instance of new input, we
developed guidelines that allow us to combine pre-AACR2 description with
current access practice.  Thus in most instances we can upgrade the
record based on the original source card without having to physically
inspect the material itself.  The guidelines are:

1)      determine the AACR2 choice of entry and adjust as needed;

2)      put all access points into the AACR2 form and support with authority
work as needed; ensure that both the series added entries and the series
numbering in any existing analytics reflect the AACR2 form;

3)      a special formula was developed for retaining in a general note
information about supplements, indexes, etc. that were formerly
represented on the catalog card for the main work to preclude
recataloging both the parent work and any "dashed-on" entries;

4)      when adding information to a record, generally follow the style of
the original cataloging; as a rule, do not mix ISBD and non-ISBD styles
or AACR2 and pre-AACR2 styles;

5)      add a contents note, if appropriate, when adding to the record for an
item previously thought to be complete in one part;

6)      when adding to the record of an item already known to be multipart,
do not add a contents note if it was omitted under earlier policy;

7)      if the style used in the contents note is clear, follow it when
adding new volumes; if anything is unclear (e.g., inclusion or omission
of subtitles or statements of responsibility for individual volumes),
follow the pattern already in the record or on the card; this may mean,
for example, omitting an author statement from the volume in hand
because volumes already in the contents note lack the statement of
responsibility.

To assist the next user of the record, we add a local note that
indicates whether the changes made reflect both choice of entry and
access points or only the latter.  The appropriate MARC 21 values are
set for the Leader and the 008 (Fixed-Length Data Elements).  Values in
Leader/17 (Encoding level) and Leader/18 (Descriptive cataloging form)
and 008/39 (Cataloging source) are especially useful in identifying
these records that reflect a combination of old and new practice.  Such
records are distributed by the Library's Cataloging Distribution
Service, along with current records, via the MARC Distribution Service.

Under the LC ILS, PREMARC records are no longer segregated into a
separate physical file and are therefore now part of the cataloging
"universe."  We are in the process of planning how, over time, we can
upgrade the heading structure in PREMARC records to reflect current
practice.  We will only distribute such records when they are 1)
complete in relation to the original source card and 2) all the headings
in a particular record have been upgraded to current practice.  The
emphasis of this activity will be on upgrading the heading structure.

OTHER RECORDS THAT REFLECT A MIXTURE OF PRACTICE

LC also has records, other than upgraded PREMARC records, that reflect a
mixture of practice.  These are machine-readable bibliographic records
that were part of LC's "current catalog" at the time AACR2 was adopted
in 1981.  We have never had the resources to update systematically all
the headings in these records to reflect current practice, although many
individual instances of headings have been updated.  When such a record
is changed, it is also distributed via the MARC Distribution Service.

LC PERSPECTIVE

LC's perspective is that the PCC will need to decide, through its
standard decision-making process, whether to include in the Program
records that reflect a previous practice for the description but current
practice for headings.  LC's Director for Cataloging, Beacher Wiggins,
currently holds the view that such records should not be labeled PCC
records, but he will follow any consideration of the issues closely and
with interest.

Kay Guiles
Cataloging Policy and Support Office
October 7, 1999

posted by Ana Cristan
Cooperative Cataloging

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

June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
November 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
January 2017
December 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 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
October 2013
September 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
September 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
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
May 2004
March 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
April 2003
March 2003
January 2003
December 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
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
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager