Many thanks to Carl, William, and Charles for sending these comments.

We have subscribed to this serial/series since v. 1 from 1963, but I see that the cataloguing agency that created the SAR in 2015 limited their analysis to 2011 onwards.

That could reduce the re-cataloguing work. Using a classed as a collection number that matches that on the serial record is of course the best way to reduce effort in that we wouldn't have to retrieve the volumes from the stacks for re-labelling. The work could actually be done from home.

I'm pleased to see that it is still ok to class as a collection. We recently moved to OCLC WorldShare, so we'd need to add another 646 to the actual SAR, not having a local copy of the authority record in our system.

Browsing the series title in OCLC Connexion shows most records are in QK, with only a few in T (and also ebook versions), so it would probably be ok to class as a collection.

The richness of the monograph records with detailed 505s does suggest that users could discover these books more easily with monograph records.

For the time being, I'll let sleeping dogs lie, but I am pleased to have the perspective of other cataloguing agencies.

Best wishes, Karen

Karen Jensen

Acting Associate University Librarian, Collection Services
Concordia University Library

Collection Services

7141 Sherbrooke Street West, VL-301-60

Montreal, QC  H4B 1R6

(514) 848-2424, ext. 7749

[log in to unmask]

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Charles Croissant <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: May 20, 2021 9:33 AM
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] When to analyze monographic series?

Attention This email originates from outside the concordia.ca domain. // Ce courriel provient de l'exterieur du domaine de concordia.ca

Karen's question about set records versus analytics led to some general thoughts on the subject:

-- Cataloging a monographic series on a set record is a convenience for the cataloger, but it comes at the cost of service to the user. Individual volume records will always provide better access to the information contained in a single volume.

-- Set records and individual volume records can co-exist in the same catalog. Especially in the case of long-running monographic series received on standing order, a set record is necessary for your acquisitions staff so they can check in volumes as they are received. Most library systems will allow you to suppress such a record from public view if so desired. Or, you can allow it to display and add a public note to the record with an explanation to the user. Here's an example from my library's catalog:

-- The question of whether to class together or class separately can be decided on a case-by-case basis. If all the volumes in a series cluster around the same subject area, not much is gained by classing separately. If you have a classed-together series that covers a range of subjects, consider reclassing separately, if your staff resources allow. If that's not the case, it's certainly OK to continue classing together. Your local decision about class-together versus class-separately can be recorded in your local copy of the series authority record.

Charles Croissant
Saint Louis University

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Young, William C <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2021 6:28 AM
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: [External] Re: [PCCLIST] When to analyze monographic series?
Howdy Karen,

        I am a proponent of never allowing the way something is purchased to dictate how something is cataloged.  Not, in the case of a monographic series, how it is classified.  Barring input from the selector (or neutral input), I consider a class together call number when items in the series work together like jigsaw puzzle pieces - where the user is likely to want to read or refer to multiple items in the series.  If the topics are far-flung, then a class sep call number is preferred.  A good guide is "Are the subject headings often used as related subject terms, or even broader topics of each other"?  If the first letter of the call number would be different (say one analytic is on plumbing and another on playground facilities) then class sep is certainly most likely the way to go, as is analyzation.  One of the beauties of most modern ILSs is that an item record can be easily attached to both a series record and an analytic record, so why not use both?  That at least only leaves the question of classification.

        This is a question best left to your selector, who knows the answers to the questions Carl asks.  Here we recently had one series that is issued once or twice a year.  The selector purchases one copy for her collection, but then another copy which stays in Course Reserves with a classed together call number.  This is a pain, and I have little doubt that some will slip through the cracks, but we have placed a usage note on our local authority record to this effect (which most catalogers here will ignore).  Since neither copy is on a standing order, there is nowhere else to record this information.


William C. (Hank) Young
Serials Coordinator
Shared Collections Department
University of Florida

-----Original Message-----
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Horne, Carl Stanley
Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2021 8:22 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] When to analyze monographic series?

[External Email]

Hello Karen,

If your library has a subscription to the monographic series, you will need the serials bibliographic record for the work of your Acquisitions staff.

Cataloging the individual issues on the serials bib record will mean that you cannot provide access to the individual titles that are unique to the issues.  How valuable is that access likely to be for your library's patrons?  Depending on that answer, it may make good sense to catalog the issues on the serials bib. record, thereby saving cataloger time & effort.

If the decision is to analyze the individual issues, then another question arises:
If the issues of a monographic series are analyzed, would those issues get quite varied call numbers?  (An example of this would be the Acta of a university.)
1) If yes, then the other extreme is more likely to be attractive.  By the 'other extreme' I mean classifying the issues separately, assigning a 'from-scratch' separate call number to each of them.
2) If, on the other hand, the issues would get call numbers that clustered together, then little specificity is gained by the effort of a cataloger assigning an individual call number to each issue.  (An example of this is a monographic series I dealt with where all of the issues were devoted to the history of one town.)  In this case, I made the series 'classed together' under one number, and the only element that is unique to the individual issue is the volume number at the end of the call number.

I hope this helps.


Carl Horne
Slavic and Central Eurasian Cataloger
 & NACO/SACO Liaison
Indiana University Library
Bloomington, IN  47405

-----Original Message-----
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Karen Jensen
Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2021 6:50 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [External] When to analyze monographic series?

This message was sent from a non-IU address. Please exercise caution when clicking links or opening attachments from external sources.


There is a CONSER record for Advances in botanical research with ISSN 0065-2296 and the note Vols. also have distinctive titles, and also a Series Authority Record for that title.

It seems that most issues have monograph records, but there are duplicate records with some not having 050s, or only classed as a collection 050s. I realize monographic series are generally classed separately now.

How do you usually decide in these cases whether to retain the serial record, or begin receiving issues as parts of a monographic series?

Thanks for any advice, Karen

Karen Jensen
Concordia University
Montreal, Quebec