<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.3059" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY style="MARGIN: 4px 4px 1px; FONT: 12pt Tahoma; COLOR: #000000">
<DIV>The Library of Michigan creates copy specific information in a 590 note with the statement beginning, LM copy #: and then everything pertinent to that copy. We stopped creating a 500 signature note when we merged our catalog with Michigan State's. After several instances of a new record overlaying ours and our copy specific information just disappearing, we started putting everything in a 590. The system is set up to retain all 590 notes, but not to protect all 500 notes. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The information is aimed at staff and at researchers who want to know what might be different about our copy. We've been asked more than once about a copy's binding or no. of plates and it's quicker to look at the catalog record instead of retrieve the piece.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I don't know about any legal protections such a note would provide but I want to know how many plates, maps, etc. were in the book the day we acquired it.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The 590 does not appear in OCLC master records so subsequent use does not require deleting the information.</DIV>
<DIV>Carol Fink</DIV>
<DIV>Library of Michigan</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><BR>>>> edwin.schroeder@yale.edu 7/16/2007 1:37 PM >>><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="COLOR: #000000">I would like to go back to Deborah's original statement. Who would such a <BR>note be aimed at? I'm not certain that making such a note would make much <BR>difference in a court of law, and would want to confirm its value. If it <BR>is for "internal" purposes, then it is possible to perhaps add such a note <BR>in either a 9XX field or perhaps as part of the holdings record, but in a <BR>non-public field.<BR><BR>Jane has been doing something comparable for Beinecke's serial records as <BR>we gradually work through the recon records. I believe she puts such a <BR>note in the holdings record.<BR><BR>E.C. Schroeder<BR><BR>P.S. Jane, aren't you busy at RBS?<BR><BR>At 01:24 PM 7/16/2007, jane.gillis@yale.edu wrote:<BR>>2 points.<BR>><BR>>1. I think Institutional Records might include 590 notes.<BR>><BR>>2. OCLC records are not just for catalogers. They can be used for<BR>>bibliographical purposes, for interlibrary loan, etc.<BR>><BR>>It will be interesting to see how IRs will affect the OCLC database.<BR>><BR>>Jane Gillis<BR>><BR>>Quoting John Overholt <overholt@fas.harvard.edu>:<BR>><BR>>>It seems like you'd want the note in a holdings record if possible, or at <BR>>>least in a field that doesn't end up in the WorldCat master record (which <BR>>>a 590 wouldn't, if I'm not mistaken). If you were creating an original <BR>>>record in Connexion, I guess you'd have to wait to add it until after you <BR>>>exported to your local system. I've always preferred keeping local <BR>>>information out of WorldCat unless it has implications for other <BR>>>libraries cataloging the same item.<BR>>>--John<BR>>><BR>>>John Overholt<BR>>>Assistant Curator<BR>>>The Donald and Mary Hyde Collection of Dr. Samuel Johnson/<BR>>>Early Modern Books and Manuscripts<BR>>>Houghton Library<BR>>>Harvard University<BR>>><A href="http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/hydeblog">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/hydeblog</A><BR>>><BR>>><BR>>><BR>>>Margaret Nichols wrote:<BR>>>>One thought that occurs to me is that since people don't always remove <BR>>>>the previous institution's notes from the record when they copy it for <BR>>>>their own institution, the "collated & perfect" note might end up being <BR>>>>misleading in those cases. On the other hand, if the note begins with <BR>>>>"Folger copy" or the like, I suppose that removes that danger (except <BR>>>>for the occasional extremely unobservant patron).<BR>>>><BR>>>>Hope this doesn't sound too muddled--it's Monday ...<BR>>>><BR>>>>Cheers,<BR>>>><BR>>>>Margaret Nichols<BR>>>><BR>>>>At 05:02 PM 7/14/2007, you wrote:<BR>>>><BR>>>>>At ALA annual this year, RBMS co-sponsored a program with MAGERT on <BR>>>>>library map security. One of the speakers was Smiley's prosecuting <BR>>>>>attorney, who stated that a catalog record that didn't mention <BR>>>>>imperfections wouldn't stand up in court as evidence that it had no <BR>>>>>imperfections at the time it was cataloged; a defense attorney would <BR>>>>>merely need to find a few examples of cataloging that failed to mention <BR>>>>>existing imperfections at the time of cataloging.<BR>>>>><BR>>>>>It occurred to me that for cataloging rare materials, it might be worth <BR>>>>>considering incorporating the old "collated & perfect" (sometimes <BR>>>>>abbreviated "c.&p.") note that booksellers and collectors used to <BR>>>>>pencil into books or include in descriptions. I'm imagining something <BR>>>>>like this, where a note on the state of the volume's completeness would <BR>>>>>come at the front of all copy-specific notes:<BR>>>>><BR>>>>>590 Folger copy: C.&p. DJL 20070714. Bound in <...><BR>>>>><BR>>>>>Thoughts?<BR>>>>><BR>>>>>_____________________________<BR>>>>>Deborah J. Leslie, M.A., M.L.S.<BR>>>>>Head of Cataloging<BR>>>>>Folger Shakespeare Library<BR>>>>>djleslie@folger.edu<BR>>>>>_ <A href="http://www.folger.edu_">http://www.folger.edu_</A><BR>>>><BR>>>>________________________________<BR>>>><BR>>>>Margaret Nichols<BR>>>>Head, Special Collections Materials Unit<BR>>>>Library Technical Services<BR>>>>110 Olin Library<BR>>>>Cornell University<BR>>>>Ithaca, NY. 14853-5302<BR>>>>mnr1@cornell.edu * Tel. (607) 255-5752 / 255-3530 * Fax (607) 255-9524<BR>>>><BR><BR><BR></DIV></BODY></HTML>