<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Garamond;
panose-1:2 2 4 4 3 3 1 1 8 3;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Californian FB";
panose-1:2 7 4 3 6 8 11 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoPlainText, li.MsoPlainText, div.MsoPlainText
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:Garamond;
color:windowtext;
font-weight:normal;
font-style:normal;
text-decoration:none none;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 77.95pt 1.0in 77.95pt;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face=Garamond><span style='font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:Garamond'>I wasn’t sure what the response to my original email
would be, but I have to say that I am thrilled with the helpful suggestions I
have received, as well as the very interesting overall discussion. Many of my
questions have been answered to my satisfaction, but many others have been raised.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face=Garamond><span style='font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:Garamond'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face=Garamond><span style='font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:Garamond'>I think part of what makes this all so interesting is, in
fact, the issue of institutional practice. I have received very different and
even contradictory responses, but they are all backed up by sound, local
reasoning. Now I “just” have to decide what our own practice will
be, and why...<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face=Garamond><span style='font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:Garamond'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face=Garamond><span style='font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:Garamond'>The issue of OCLC is one that I keep coming back to as I
read messages on this list. Aside from my own personal misgivings about OCLC as
the single national catalogue, it also affects our cataloguing decisions. We
are currently not a member of OCLC and do not submit records, but I have no
doubt that will change sometime in the future. Do we want to record our
copy-specific notes on inscriptions, ownership, etc. in field that may upload
to OCLC? Is that appropriate? My instinct is to keep copy-specific notes in
fields which would display only in our own system (or use a subfield 5 and have
them stripped out). But is that then removing information that might be useful
to a researcher? Because I do not regularly use or catalogue for OCLC, I do not
have a real sense of what is expected, or approved of, or what is “normal”
practice. I have a general feeling that I am missing something... Or perhaps
the whole OCLC/RLIN issue really is just that confusing.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face=Garamond><span style='font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:Garamond'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face=Garamond><span style='font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:Garamond'>(And speaking of library software, we are in the process
of seeking out a new system ourselves. If anyone wants to share advice,
recommendations, battle stories, etc. – off list, maybe? – I would
be grateful).<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face=Garamond><span style='font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:Garamond'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face=Garamond><span style='font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:Garamond'>-Katy<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face=Garamond><span style='font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:Garamond'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face=Garamond><span style='font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:Garamond'>____________________<br>
</span></font><font size=2 face="Californian FB"><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Californian FB"'>Katy Rawdon-Faucett<br>
Archivist and Librarian<br>
The Barnes Foundation<br>
300 North Latch's Lane<br>
Merion, PA 19066-1759<br>
Ph: (610) 667-0290 ext. 1048<br>
Fax: (610) 664-4026<br>
<a href="blocked::mailto:krawdon@barnesfoundation.org">krawdon@barnesfoundation.org</a><br>
<font color=purple><span style='color:purple'><a
href="http://www.barnesfoundation.org/archives.html">www.barnesfoundation.org/archives.html</a></span></font>
<br>
<br>
</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>-----Original Message-----<br>
From: dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu] On Behalf
Of Karen Nipps<br>
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 9:37 AM<br>
To: DCRM Revision Group List<br>
Cc: overholt@fas.harvard.edu; Andrea Cawelti; nipps@fas.harvard.edu;
mslevy@fas.harvard.edu; walker2@fas.harvard.edu<br>
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Subfield $5 / Several cataloguing questions</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>Well, David (Woodruff) and Katy (Rawdon-Faucett), when you asked these <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>innocent questions, did you ever imagine such a multi-faceted <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>response?!?! Just goes to show that cataloging really IS an art (if
also <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>a science).<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>And this is why I so rarely weigh in on these sorts of issues. So very <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>much depends on institutional practice, local system operations, and <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>individual interpretations. It has, for instance, been my experience, <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>that the larger and more complex the organization, the more cautious
one <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>has to be about making one's records work ONLY for one's own <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>constituents. This is increasingly becoming the case as OCLC retools <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>itself as the single on-line national union catalog and Ex-Libris seems
<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>to be attempting to swallow up the entire international library
software <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>community.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>However, in this case, I am going to voice an opinion and agree with <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>Nina and Richard on the 650 score, largely because MARC21, as Nina <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>points out, directly says using a subfield 5 is permissible under the <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>defined circumstances. For those of us who load records into OCLC, this
<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>is in fact why the subfield 5 is so important, as it is a way to strip <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>local headings out of exported records.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>As for the 500 / 590 issue, it is dangerous to assume that most <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>institutions out there use 590s. But whether you do or don't, IMHO, it <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>doesn't matter that much - what is important is the language you use <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>when inserting your note. And this is where the "art" bit
comes in. My <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>simple (!) advice is use as much language as it necessary to <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>contextualize your own copy and to justify any added entries you make. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>More is better - but too much is worse! :) Granted, if you are bound by
<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>space limitations (either electronic or paper), that advice must itself
<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>be qualified ...<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>The 692 field is a local field (all X90s are). It is Yale's choice to <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>use it. At Houghton, the use of X90s in bibliographic records for <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>printed material is strictly forbotten. (Not true of other parts of <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>Harvard.) Rather, a note is made in the 561 in the holdings record <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>describing the inscription and a 700 is made in the bibliographic
record <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>with subfield "e"s and "5"s added. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>Hope this rambling helps! - Karen<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>-- <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>*************************************<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>Karen Nipps, Senior Rare Book Cataloger<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>Houghton Library<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>Harvard University<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>Cambridge, MA 02138<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>(T) 617-495-2509; (F) 617-495-1376<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>**************************************<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>