<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:st1="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" 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)">
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style>
<![endif]--><o:SmartTagType
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="PostalCode"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="State"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="City"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="PlaceType"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="PlaceName"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="place"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="PersonName"/>
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 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
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>But does this mean that those of us who
transitioned from RLIN should NOW be coding our 590s to display? This was
never brought to our attention during training and we continued to use MARC
practice. Our Manuscript catalogers “cleaned up” their private
590s when the ARC segment vanished and none of us have been using the 590 for
private information and would like them to display in our institution records.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>If the default is to “mask”
these, we might need to consult with OCLC during the upload of our RLIN records
(we opted to send them from our IL instead of from RLIN) so that they’re
globally set to display. Our database manager is going to LOVE this one. He
already thinks rare book records are a PIA <smile> Ok, not quite, but I
do sometimes think he thinks we’re crazy.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><sigh><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Dorothy Auyong<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Principal Rare Book Cataloger<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on"><font size=2
color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;
color:navy'>Huntington</span></font></st1:place></st1:City><font size=2
color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;
color:navy'> Library<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>dauyong@huntington.org<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<div class=MsoNormal align=center style='margin-left:.5in;text-align:center'><font
size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>
<hr size=2 width="100%" align=center tabindex=-1>
</span></font></div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><b><font size=2 face=Tahoma><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma;font-weight:bold'>From:</span></font></b><font
size=2 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma'>
dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu] <b><span
style='font-weight:bold'>On Behalf Of </span></b>Margaret Nichols<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Sent:</span></b> Tuesday, December 11, 2007
11:02 AM<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>To:</span></b> <st1:PersonName w:st="on">DCRM
Revision Group List</st1:PersonName><br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Subject:</span></b> Re: [DCRM-L]
"Private" fields in OCLC</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'>I suspect that it's being proposed to make the 590
field private by default because it contains some of the collection management
information that used to go in the "ARC segment" of manuscript and
archival collections in RLIN. All that collection management info was private
by virtue of being in the ARC segment, and so it remained until the advent of
RLIN21, when the ARC segment was discontinued and the data got put into 541,
583, and 590 fields. So now there are scads of records out there with lots of
541s, 583s, and 590s, with no indicators, whose content was never intended to
be seen by the public. Our newly minted 590s typically contain box locations
(fortunately, outdated ones). If any of these fields were to be defined as
public by default, it would be rather disastrous: purchase prices, donors'
names and addresses, deaccessioning plans, box locations, all would be visible
to users all over the world. No, thank you.<br>
<br>
Best,<br>
<br>
Margaret<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
At 10:55 AM 12/11/2007, you wrote:<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'>I understand a group called “The RLG Union
Catalog Advisory Committee” has discussed the issue of private
information in local records with OCLC and has “ratified” the
following decision. I may be totally out of the loop, but I hadn’t heard
a whisper about it and thought maybe you all hadn’t either. I am certain
it was not discussed on this rare cataloging discussion list, at any rate, and
it does affect us.<br>
<br>
It appears that this Committee wanted to ensure that “all possible
private information was protected.” By “private” I assume
things like donors, prices paid, etc., is meant. Four fields were discussed:<br>
<br>
541, 561, 583, and 590<br>
<br>
The Committee decided that in OCLC, the first indicator in any of these field
must be coded “1” for the field to display. In other words,
if the indicator is coded “blank” or “0” the field will
<i><span style='font-style:italic'>not</span></i> display. (In the MARC format
documentation for 541, 461, and 583, “0” means private,
“1” means not private, “blank” means no information
provided. No such coding is defined for 590.)<br>
<br>
I am particularly concerned about this decision with respect to 590, and also
to some extent about 561. It appears that (nonstandard) indicators 1 and 0 have
been available for some time in OCLC for 590, but to my knowledge they were
never so defined in RLIN, and so no 590s coming from RLIN libraries will be so
coded. Therefore by fiat none of the 590s currently in RLIN-originated records,
and probably in most OCLC-originated records (I’d be interested in
hearing from OCLC catalogers if they used these indicators), will display.
Wasn’t that one of the major points about RLG libraries wanting the
institution records, that the local information would display? This action will
defeat that purpose for the majority of records.<br>
<br>
I am not in favor of “opt in” for 590, in other words, you have to
manually insert an indicator or it will not display. It seems to me that if
anyone has actually put private information in a 590 (something I would never
do in my own cataloging), the burden should be on them to use this indicator to
indicate a desire that the information NOT display, not the other way around.
In my opinion, blank should <i><span style='font-style:italic'>not</span></i>
trigger non-display. I also think the same thing about 561. 561 is not used for
the immediate source of acquisition, but for the custodial history of the item,
something that in most cases is not “private” in the sense that we
want to protect donors or hide how much we paid for the item or whatever. In
this case, too, I feel that the burden should be on the cataloger to say they
do NOT want the field displayed, not on the rest of us to say we DO want the
field to display. I feel less strongly about 583 and 541, but do hold the same
opinion about them.<br>
<br>
Anyway, though it may be after the fact, I thought this deserved discussion
here.<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Bob<br>
<br>
Robert L. Maxwell<br>
Special Collections and Ancient Languages Catalog Librarian<br>
Genre/Form Authorities Librarian<br>
6728 Harold B. Lee Library<br>
<st1:place w:st="on"><st1:PlaceName w:st="on">Brigham</st1:PlaceName> <st1:PlaceName
w:st="on">Young</st1:PlaceName> <st1:PlaceType w:st="on">University</st1:PlaceType></st1:place><br>
<st1:place w:st="on"><st1:City w:st="on">Provo</st1:City>, <st1:State w:st="on">UT</st1:State>
<st1:PostalCode w:st="on">84602</st1:PostalCode></st1:place><br>
(801)422-5568 <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p style='mso-margin-top-alt:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;
margin-left:.5in'></x-sigsep><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'><x-sigsep>________________________________<br>
<br>
Margaret Nichols<br>
Head, Special Collections Materials Unit<br>
Library Technical Services<br>
110 Olin Library<br>
<st1:place w:st="on"><st1:PlaceName w:st="on">Cornell</st1:PlaceName> <st1:PlaceType
w:st="on">University</st1:PlaceType></st1:place><br>
<st1:place w:st="on"><st1:City w:st="on">Ithaca</st1:City>, <st1:State w:st="on">NY</st1:State></st1:place>.
14853-5302 <br>
mnr1@cornell.edu * Tel. (607) 255-5752 / 255-3530 * Fax
(607) 255-9524 <br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>