I have just been lurking, but as I read this thread, I just want to jump in.

Re: Who created the 'record' I have been a cataloger for over 30 years.  Things have obviously changed. In the past, who created the record, and subsequent updates, would determine how much review was done, institutions we could trust and did not need to go over with a fine tooth comb, and those that needed to be examined carefully.  If we want to be sure that we have found the correct information, this is still important.
- Unfortunately, more recently it is a question about determining if these two (or more) records are for the same item.  If they are the same, sometimes merging information from all to create a better record.

Re: "carry forward only what can be justified by real requirements from real users", do we really know?  Starting out with a new format, we don't need to keep all that information necessarily in the same order with the same priority, but at this point, are we sure what will be needed in the future?  I personally have always questioned the place of publication appearing to be more important than the publisher, and with publishers merging and changing names and moving, how useful is it today?  But I certainly don't know what the future will bring, I would hate to not even provide a place for that information, then realize 10 yrs down the road that times have changed again and that data would have been helpful.  Maybe moving the 'less needed' data to what we would currently consider a 500 notes field would at least preserve what we have while keeping it 'out of the way'


Kathleen Goldfarb
Technical Services Librarian
College of the Mainland
Texas City, TX 77539
409 933 8202

 Please consider whether it is necessary to print this email.

-----Original Message-----
From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Kevin M Randall
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 1:35 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] Thoughts on provenance

Roy Tennant wrote:

> In all of my 37 years working in libraries I've never
> encountered a situation where it was necessary to know where the title
> came from to do useful work with bibliographic data. In what situations is this
> necessary, and why?

Okay, it looks like we've got two different meanings of "provenance" going on in this thread.  I think Kelley McGrath started out talking about "provenance" meaning WHO CREATED the metadata.  Because some of the message talked about sources of data on the resource, this got morphed into a discussion also about WHERE THE DATA APPEARED ON THE RESOURCE.

That being said, I think that *both* things are useful.  I would consider myself quite blessed if I were able to say that I've never needed to have this information through my entire career.  If we're talking about creator of the metadata, that would be very, very useful in so many situations.  In a MARC record, when there is more than one institution identified in the 040 field, there are many times I have needed to know, for example, which library changed to serial from active to ceased, or which library added a note or added entry--at the very least, so I could contact that library and determine if something I have in hand is really the same thing as what the other cataloger saw.  And if we're talking about where on the resource the data appears, that is also helpful, especially with resources having the same or similar titles, and/or bearing multiple publisher/issuing body names.

And in regard to the idea that we should "carry forward only what can be justified by real requirements from real users", I would certainly hope that we keep in mind that people who create, manipulate, and manage metadata ARE "real users"!

Kevin M. Randall
Principal Serials Cataloger
Bibliographic Services Dept.
Northwestern University Library
1970 Campus Drive
Evanston, IL  60208-2300
email: [log in to unmask]
phone: (847) 491-2939
fax:   (847) 491-4345