Sorry, folks. Obviously not meant for the list. -- Jim LeBlanc At 10:33 AM 4/25/2006, you wrote: >>X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.1.2 >>X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 mlx=0 >>adultscore=0 adjust=0 reason=mlx engine=3.1.0-06041100 >>definitions=3.0.0-06042501 >>X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 mlx=0 >> adultscore=0 adjust=0 reason=mlx >> engine=3.1.0-06041100 >> definitions=3.0.0-06042501 >>Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 07:36:15 -0400 >>Reply-To: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]> >>Sender: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]> >>X-PH: V4.1@filter02 >>From: Jim LeBlanc <[log in to unmask]> >>Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Series Authority Work: Series Treatment >>information in Series Authority Records >>Comments: To: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]> >>To: [log in to unmask] >>List-Help: <http://listserv.loc.gov/cgi-bin/wa?LIST=PCCLIST>, >> <mailto:[log in to unmask] PCCLIST> >>List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:[log in to unmask]> >>List-Subscribe: <mailto:[log in to unmask]> >>List-Owner: <mailto:[log in to unmask]> >>List-Archive: <http://listserv.loc.gov/cgi-bin/wa?LIST=PCCLIST> >>X-PMX-Version: 4.7.1.128075, Antispam-Engine: 2.1.0.0, Antispam-Data: >>2006.4.25.33109 >>X-PMX-Version: 4.7.1.128075, Antispam-Engine: 2.1.0.0, Antispam-Data: >>2006.4.25.35108 >> >>Sarah- >> And this about the backlash against Def Phat Cool Cats ... >> >>-- Jim >> >> >>At 05:13 PM 4/24/2006, you wrote: >>>The DCM has explicit provisions for recording national-level, Library of >>>Congress, and PCC local decisions for form of numbering and tracing >>>practice in SARs. >>> >>>In the SAR template that is supplied with the RLIN21 Cataloging Client, the >>>prompted field 645 includes "$5DPCC" and when users automatically generate >>>authority records from 4XX or 8XX fields, this value is also supplied >>>automatically. RLIN21 users can themselves remove this value from >>>templates used for series authority records. To prevent this value from >>>being prompted in generated records will require a system change that >>>cannot be implemented by May 1, 2006. >>> >>>Antony's message says that "the Library of Congress will continue to >>>process and redistribute these [series authority] records as part of its >>>regular file distribution." What should users do about national-level and >>>LC decisions when doing maintenance on existing authority records or >>>creating new ones? Will LC reject LC/NACO records that contain "$5DPCC" or >>>"$5DLC" in any of the 64X series numbering and treatment fields? I didn't >>>see any mention of this in the recent flurry of remarks about this LC >>>decision. >>> >>>Ed Glazier >>>Principal Analyst >>>RLG >>>2029 Stierlin Court >>>Suite 100 >>>Mountain View, CA 94043-4684 >>>[log in to unmask] >>>(650) 691-2261; fax (650) 964-0943 >> >> >>************************************************** >>Jim LeBlanc >>Head, Database Management Services >>Library Technical Services >>110A Olin Library >>Cornell University >>Ithaca, NY 14853 >> >>Phone: (607) 254-5290 >>Fax: (607) 255-6110 >>E-mail: [log in to unmask] >>http://www.library.cornell.edu/tsweb/