Print

Print


[log in to unmask]">

Alexis,

 

Linking fields serve at least two purposes:

·         They provide a way to link to a related resource

·         They provide a note about a related resource

 

Depending on your indexing, they can also enhance access.

 

Because you have decided to suppress 776 display, you’re not going to get a note displayed from that field.  IMO, a 530 in the master record duplicates the note function of the 776 and (in the spirit of reducing duplication in the CONSER standard record) is not encouraged.  You can locally do whatever you want with that record once it’s in your local ILS (and even in a shared/network-level environment, one usually has a local note option).   

 

Steve

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Alexis Zirpoli
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2018 11:30 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Serial ceases in print and continues online - best practice for 362?

 

Thanks, Steve.

 

Part of the rationale I had for including the reference to the format in the 362 is that at our library we don't include the 776 if we don't have the e-version in our catalog. In that case, do you recommend using a 530, or some other way to note that the print version ceased but there is some other version out there in the greater world (but not in this particular library)?

 

- Alexis

 

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 5:28 PM Steven C Shadle <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

CONSER Cataloging Manual 31.15 provides the following example with no additional notes:

 

Record for the print manifestation:

110

2#

$a Library and Information Technology Association (U.S.) $e author

245

10

$a LITA newsletter.

362

0#

$a No. 1 (winter 1980)-v. 18, no. 4 (fall 1997).

776

08

$i Continued online: $a Library and Information Technology Association (U.S.)$e author. $t LITA newsletter $x 1079-123X $w (DLC)sn 94004077 $x (OCoLC)31406418

 

Record for the online manifestation:

110

2#

$a Library and Information Technology Association (U.S.) $e author

245

10

$a LITA newsletter

588

##

$a Description based on: Vol. 16, no. 2 (spring 1995); title from journal home page (LITA home page, viewed Jan. 13, 1999).

776

08

$i Print version: $a Library and Information Technology Association (U.S.)$e author. $t LITA newsletter $x 0196-1799 $w (DLC)   84647365 $w (OCoLC)5757570

There is an option for you to provide more information in the 776 $i:

 

Also use 776 $i to explain relationships between different formats of a title (although 580 field remains an option to describe a complex situation). For example, if a print title ceases, but the online manifestation continues, the cataloger may note this relationship as

           

776

08

$i Continued online: … [on the record for the print title]

776

08

$i Print version, 2008:  [on the record for the online title]

 

In general, I would minimize the reference to a formats in the 362.  Ceased in print implies another format.  What happens if that format disappears?

 

 

Steve Shadle / Interim Head of Serials Cataloging, University of Washington Libraries                                                              

Box 352900                                                                                                                  [log in to unmask]

Seattle, WA 98195-2900                                                                                             (206) 685-3983

 

 

 

 

 

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Alexis Zirpoli
Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2018 1:33 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Serial ceases in print and continues online - best practice for 362?

 

And now that I think about it I only recall seeing "Ceased in print" in the e-version records. So what is the best practice for closing the print bib in terms of conveying that the print is dead but the online is still out there? Do you convey this in a 530? A 580? Or only convey this in the 776? 

 

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 4:17 PM Alexis Zirpoli <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

All,

 

Prior to my taking the realm as the serials cataloger here my library typically did not close the record for a print serial if it ceased in print and continues online. I am working to change that (as well as trying to work away from the single record approach for print and online versions). 

 

My question is on the wording of the unformatted 362 when closing out a print serial record when that serial ceases in print and continues online. Is it unconventional or discouraged to use "ceased in print" in the 362? To me it makes sense to use that wording but perhaps I am thinking about it in the wrong way. My thinking is one would use a 362 1 "Ceased in print with..." accompanied with a 776 08 $i "Continues online..."

 

What is CONSER best practice in this scenario?

--

Alexis Zirpoli
Serials Librarian
University of Michigan Law School - Law Library
734.647-1563


801 Monroe Street, S-110B Legal Research
Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1210

 

Pronouns: they/them/theirs


 

--

Alexis Zirpoli
Serials Librarian
University of Michigan Law School - Law Library
734.647-1563


801 Monroe Street, S-110B Legal Research
Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1210

 

Pronouns: they/them/theirs


 

--

Alexis Zirpoli
Serials Librarian
University of Michigan Law School - Law Library
734.647-1563


801 Monroe Street, S-110B Legal Research
Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1210

 

Pronouns: they/them/theirs