Print

Print


Not just early implementation. It's no secret that far too many institutions continue to use uncontrolled vocabulary in fields where controlled vocabulary is preferred.  The 373 field could be added to the list.

 

Gary L. Strawn, Authorities Librarian, etc.           Twitter: GaryLStrawn

Northwestern University Library, 1970 Campus Drive, Evanston IL 60208-2300

e-mail: [log in to unmask]   voice: 847/491-2788   fax: 847/491-8306

Forsan et haec olim meminisse iuvabit.       BatchCat version: 2008.22.409

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Moore, Richard
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 2:47 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Best practices in updating authority records (erratum)

 

Please ignore the correction. It was earlier than I thought.  

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Moore, Richard
Sent: 26 February 2015 07:33
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [PCCLIST] Best practices in updating authority records (erratum)

 

I meant to say in my final paragraph below:

 

“Many NARs from early in the RDA implementation use UNcontrolled vocabulary…”

 

It’s early here…

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Moore, Richard
Sent: 26 February 2015 07:27
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Best practices in updating authority records

 

I agree that we should not be removing terms from one controlled vocabulary to replace them with terms from another controlled vocabulary. The latter can be recorded additionally if desired. I also don’t think it’s efficient to second-guess another instituion’s judgement over the location of a conference, and apologise to NLM if we’re responsible for any of those changes.

 

However, it is PCC policy to prefer controlled vocabulary for terms in 368, 372 and 374. This is stated explicitly in DCM:Z1, which is a NACO standard. It’s also policy to use LC/NAF terms (when they exist) in 370. Many NARs from early in the RDA implementation use controlled vocabulary for none of these fields, and it’s perfectly acceptable to upgrade them, if time is available (which usually it isn’t).

 

Regards

Richard

 

________________________

Richard Moore

Authority Control Team Manager

The British Library

                                                                       

Tel.: +44 (0)1937 546104                                  

E-mail: [log in to unmask]                              

 

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Deborah J. Leslie
Sent: 26 February 2015 01:41
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Best practices in updating authority records

 

Agreed that NACO members should not be removing existing 3xx fields. But what do folks think about updating unauthorized place names—most if not all entered during the early RDA days—to their naf forms?  

 

Deborah J. Leslie | Folger Shakespeare Library | [log in to unmask] | 202.675-0369 | 201 East Capitol St., SE, Washington, DC 20003 | www. folger.edu

 

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Boehr, Diane (NIH/NLM) [E]
Sent: Wednesday, 25 February 25 2015 15:45
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [PCCLIST] Best practices in updating authority records

 

We are seeing a disturbing trend of libraries removing various 3XX fields from authority records created by NLM to substitute LCSH terms.  We would like to remind PCC libraries that not everyone uses LCSH and while it is perfectly permissible to add an additional 3XX from your preferred controlled vocabulary, please do not remove the existing data from authority records.  

 

NLM policy is to always include a 3XX that corresponds to a qualifier in the AAP needed to make it unique or convey the idea that the name is a corporate body.  It may or may not come from a controlled vocabulary and that is perfectly acceptable in RDA and the PCC guidelines. For example, several libraries have taken NLM authority records with a 111 we had created with the qualifier (Conference)  and deleted our 368 of Conference and substituted a 368 of Congresses and conventions $2 lcsh.  We believe the 368 that corresponds to the 111 qualifier needs to remain in the record, with the additional 368 from the controlled vocabulary, if desired.

 

In a similar type of situation, libraries have changed a 370 field supplied by NLM as a conference location (in correct authorized form) to substitute a more specific location that the library found from further research, but did not appear on the item being cataloged.   We ask that PCC libraries respect the judgment of others and add what you need/want to the authority records, but do not remove elements from records that are not incorrect and do not change AAPs unless they are actually wrong.

 

Thanks,

 

Diane Boehr

Head of Cataloging and Metadata Management

National Library of Medicine

8600 Rockville Pike

Bethesda, MD 20894

301-435-7059

[log in to unmask]

 

 

 


 
******************************************************************************************************************

Experience the British Library online at www.bl.uk

The British Library’s latest Annual Report and Accounts : www.bl.uk/aboutus/annrep/index.html

Help the British Library conserve the world's knowledge. Adopt a Book. www.bl.uk/adoptabook

The Library's St Pancras site is WiFi - enabled

*****************************************************************************************************************

The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended for the addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this e-mail and notify the [log in to unmask] : The contents of this e-mail must not be disclosed or copied without the sender's consent.

The statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the British Library. The British Library does not take any responsibility for the views of the author.

*****************************************************************************************************************

Think before you print