Print

Print


I’m not aware of the reason for this longstanding policy.  Someone from LC Policy and Standards will have to answer that question.  The only LC documentation I’ve found is in the Subject Headings Manual and the Descriptive Cataloging Manual, but it doesn’t give any rationales:

 

Subject Headings Manual

Appendix F: Subject-Related Codes in Field 008 - Books

 

4.  008/33 (Literary form).  If the work is fiction, select the code 1: Fiction (not further specified).  Select this code only for prose fiction classed in P in the LC classification.  Do not use the code for drama, poetry, folklore material classed in G, or mythology classed in B.  If the work is not fiction, accept the default setting 0: Not fiction (not further specified).  Do not select any code other than 0 or 1.

 

Descriptive Cataloging Manual

B13. Copy Cataloging Manual

 

B13.3.4.2. 008 (Fixed Fields)

Add/change values as needed to ensure that values related to the resource are assigned in the 008 field according to regular LC practice.  Further information on appropriate values can be found in MARC 21 Format for Bibliographic Data and, for those related to subject cataloging, in SCM D 145.  See B13.7 (Appendix 4) for dates in the 008 field for multipart monographs.

# = blank

LC ILS Name of Data Element

Action

Type of date (008/06)

Ensure code reflects type of date in field 260

Date 1 (008/07-10)

Ensure date is correct and agrees with date in field 260

Date 2 (008/11-14)

Ensure date is correct, if needed, and agrees with a 2nd date in field 260 or possibly field 500

Place of publication (008/15-17)

Ensure code reflects place of publication of resource

Illustrations (008/18, 19, 20, 21)

Codes (up to 4 may be given) must agree with data in field 300 $b or $a for plates

Target audience (008/22)

If juvenile literature, ensure code is  “j”

Form of item (008/23)

# unless large print ( “d” ) or microform (code as appropriate)

Nature of contents (008/24, 25, 26, 27)

Ensure codes (up to 4 may be given) reflect nature of contents  (bibliography, etc.) of resource

Government publication (008/28)

If a government publication, ensure appropriate code

Conference publication (008/29)

If a conference publication, ensure code is “1”

Festschrift (008/30)

If a Festschrift, ensure code is “1"

Index (008/31)

If an index present, ensure code is “1"

Literary form (008/33)

If fiction, ensure code is “1”

Biography (008/34)

If biography, ensure appropriate code

Language (008/35-37)

Ensure code reflects language of resource

Modified record (008/38)

# unless “o” for a romanizing language (e.g., Bengali)

Cataloging source (008/39)

Copy cataloging: ensure “d” (if not natl. bib. agency) or “#” if natl bibl agency or an LC-issued enc/lvl 5 rec. (usually lcode) upgraded externally

PCC adapt: “c” (if not natl. bib. agency) or “#” if natl. bib. agency

 

The LCGFT Manual, still in draft form (https://www.loc.gov/aba/publications/FreeLCGFT/freelcgft.html), doesn’t address the books 008/33, but maybe the part of SHM Appendix F shown above better belongs in this manual, since it’s not actually a subject-related code but a genre/form-related code.

 

Adam Schiff

University of Washington Libraries

[log in to unmask]

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Gordon Marr
Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2017 5:02 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: LitF

 

Oops! “… could NOT handle the process.  J

 

John G. Marr

Collections

Zimmerman Library

University of New Mexico

Albuquerque, NM 87010

[log in to unmask]

 

         **"I really like to know the reasons for what I do!"**

                                             Martha Watson

 

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

 

 

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Gordon Marr
Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2017 5:54 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] LitF

 

Adam:

 

  You mention one perfectly logical incentive for BSR revision in your post: a need to facet on the data.

 

  Has anyone asked LC what motivation they have for not coding specifically that might be more important? Surely they do not think their catalogers could handle the process?  J

 

Cheers!

 

John G. Marr

Collections

Zimmerman Library

University of New Mexico

Albuquerque, NM 87010

[log in to unmask]

 

         **"I really like to know the reasons for what I do!"**

                                             Martha Watson

 

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

 

 

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Adam L. Schiff
Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2017 5:44 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] LitF

 

The BIBCO Standard Record (BSR) RDA Metadata Application Profile (http://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/bibco/documents/PCC-RDA-BSR.pdf) does not require Literary Form to be coded in the fixed fields.  008/33 is required in some of the formats, but not for books. 

 

LC does not code it at all for poetry and drama, and for literature, it uses only “1” rather than any of the more specific codes available.  The fact that so many records for literature (particularly drama and poetry) lack any indication of what they are in the 008/33 will make it difficult to retrospectively facet on this information.  Unless there are subject headings in the record for drama or poetry, it will be difficult to retrospectively enhance the record with LCGFT terms, even general ones like Drama or Poetry.  I’ve raised this issue with the PCC Standing Committee on Standards, to discuss whether there is any incentive to revise the BSR to add 008/33 (LitF) as a core element for books.  

 

Maybe there is a way for OCLC and others to identify at least some proportion of records with 008/33 value “0” that should have some other value and replace them with the correct value.  I regularly change records for novels that have “1” to “f” and records for drama and poetry that have “0” to “d” or “p”, but this is only possible on a one-by-one as encountered basis, and does not scale.  

 

When and if LC moves to a facet-based discovery system, they may decide that not coding the 008/33 for poetry and drama was a less than useful choice.

 

Adam Schiff

University of Washington Libraries

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Chew, Chiat Naun
Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2017 2:07 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: LitF

 

The original poster asked if there was "any movement to use [LitF] more aggressively". I don't believe there is, but a related development that may be worth mentioning is the recent report to SAC on faceted vocabularies:

 

www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/documents/PoCo-2017/BraveNewFacetedWorld-170713.pdf

 

The report advocates for the use of LCGFT (among other vocabularies) and discusses the possibility of mapping LitF to genre/form terms. There's a lot to be said for preferring the easily understandable, MARC-independent, linked-data friendly genre/form vocabulary over the continued use of fixed fields for this type of information. There are mapping and alignment issues we'd still have to work through, but I think this is a direction PCC should explore.

 

Naun.

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Chew Chiat Naun

Head, Metadata Creation 

Information & Technical Services, Harvard Library

625 Massachusetts Avenue

Cambridge, MA  02139


From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of James L Woods <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: 05 December 2017 10:22:48
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] LitF

 

Same here at Wisconsin.

 

Jamie Woods

 

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

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Deborah J. Leslie
Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2017 9:14 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] LitF

 

I don't know about others, but we at the Folger make pretty full use of it.

 

Deborah J. Leslie | Folger Shakespeare Library | [log in to unmask] |

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Lavalie
Sent: Tuesday, 05 December, 2017 09:41
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [PCCLIST] LitF

 

We're moving to a new catalog that uses the fixed field element LitF to populate a facet.  We've never paid much attention to LitF, so we're going to have to start now.

 

I've noticed that in OCLC, few records go beyond 0 and 1.  What are the guidelines for LC and PCC?  Is there a movement to use this element more aggressively?

 

 

John Lavalie | Cataloging and Metadata Specialist | Des Plaines Public Library | www.dppl.org