On Tue, 8 Jun 2010, Lasater, Mary Charles wrote:

> On the more general question of the size of the pool of PCC records, are 
> others discouraged from making PCC records because present OCLC policy 
> locks them from upgrades by non-PCC libraries (although LC records CAN 
> be upgraded?).

   By "upgrade" do you actually mean "given 'enhanced' content?"  This is 
the problem with using formal terms in informal contexts.  I suppose, 
however, that changing a PCC record to an RDA record (in that eventuality) 
could be considered an "upgrade" for which we should be compensated by 
OCLC accordingly.

   I am not [yet] discouraged from making PCC records because I have been 
conditioned to think that they are of greater value to the cataloging 
community (e.g., verifying that all authority work has been done) than 
non-PCC records.

   Thinking that, however, also requires I accept the concept that OCLC 
"master" records were originally intended to facilitate cataloging, not 
local materials discovery.  Changing that paradigm changes the entire 

   As for the multiple problems others have identified with the WorldCat 
Local concept, there could be 2 separate OCLC databases, one containing 
basic generalized "master" records for catalogers' use, and one containing 
those records with localized information coded as for display only in 
relation to specific local subscribers.

   Either could also incorporate information (fields) in various languages 
or about various formats on the same record but only displaying to 
libraries selecting particular languages or formats for display (so no 
need for multiple records for the same title).


                                             John G. Marr
                                             CDS, UL
                                             Univ. of New Mexico
                                             Albuquerque, NM 87131
                                             [log in to unmask]
                                             [log in to unmask]

     **There are only 2 kinds of thinking: "out of the box" and "outside 
the box."

Opinions belong exclusively to the individuals expressing them, but
sharing is permitted.