<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:x="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:excel" xmlns:p="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:powerpoint" xmlns:a="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:access" xmlns:dt="uuid:C2F41010-65B3-11d1-A29F-00AA00C14882" xmlns:s="uuid:BDC6E3F0-6DA3-11d1-A2A3-00AA00C14882" xmlns:rs="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:rowset" xmlns:z="#RowsetSchema" xmlns:b="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:publisher" xmlns:ss="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:spreadsheet" xmlns:c="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:component:spreadsheet" xmlns:odc="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:odc" xmlns:oa="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:activation" xmlns:html="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40" xmlns:q="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" xmlns:rtc="http://microsoft.com/officenet/conferencing" xmlns:D="DAV:" xmlns:Repl="http://schemas.microsoft.com/repl/" xmlns:mt="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/meetings/" xmlns:x2="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/excel/2003/xml" xmlns:ppda="http://www.passport.com/NameSpace.xsd" xmlns:ois="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/ois/" xmlns:dir="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/directory/" xmlns:ds="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#" xmlns:dsp="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/dsp" xmlns:udc="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" xmlns:sub="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/2002/1/alerts/" xmlns:ec="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmlenc#" xmlns:sp="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/" xmlns:sps="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:udcs="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc/soap" xmlns:udcxf="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc/xmlfile" xmlns:udcp2p="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc/parttopart" xmlns:wf="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/workflow/" xmlns:dsss="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2006/digsig-setup" xmlns:dssi="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2006/digsig" xmlns:mdssi="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/package/2006/digital-signature" xmlns:mver="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/markup-compatibility/2006" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns:mrels="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/package/2006/relationships" xmlns:spwp="http://microsoft.com/sharepoint/webpartpages" xmlns:ex12t="http://schemas.microsoft.com/exchange/services/2006/types" xmlns:ex12m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/exchange/services/2006/messages" xmlns:pptsl="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/SlideLibrary/" xmlns:spsl="http://microsoft.com/webservices/SharePointPortalServer/PublishedLinksService" xmlns:Z="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:" xmlns:st="" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)">
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Arial Unicode MS";
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Palatino Linotype";
panose-1:2 4 5 2 5 5 5 3 3 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"\@Arial Unicode MS";
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
color:black;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
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","serif";
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Palatino Linotype","serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body bgcolor=white lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple>
<div class=WordSection1>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Ann, thanks for the reminder of the MASC discussion. Given that
MASC isn’t a committee and therefore can’t take formal actions, I still think
this is fertile territory for Bib Standards. Perhaps an ad hoc subcommittee?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>I’ll follow up with Glenn and to talk about following up with
RBMS. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Best wishes, Jackie<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Jackie Dooley<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Program Officer<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>OCLC Research and the RLG Partnership<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>949.492.5060 (office/home) – Pacific Time<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>949.295.1529 (mobile)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";
color:windowtext'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:
"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext'> Ann W. Copeland [mailto:auc1@psu.edu] <br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, November 03, 2010 10:56 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> DCRM Revision Group List<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Dooley,Jackie<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [DCRM-L] OCLC de-duping algorithms and dates of publication<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>Jackie,<br>
<br>
We did discuss this at what used to be called MASC last winter. Here from the
minutes:<br>
<br>
<b> A)</b>. <b><i>OCLC issues.</i></b> <br>
<br>
<i> Given the new functionality available in OCLC to improve records, are
catalogers working differently --for example, routinely adding genre/form
terms to master records? <br>
</i> <br>
Some participants said they search the OCLC database for a suitable
record to enhance using DCRM(B) cataloging rules and/or they add genre
terms and notes to AACR2 records, others said they upgrade their records
only in their local database. The concern that other catalogers could
delete the information in enhanced records in OCLC was mentioned as was the
belief that public services librarians would prefer less elaborate
records. <br>
<br>
Annie Copland reported that on behalf of the RBMS Bibliographic Standards
Committee she had written to OCLC to inquire about the possibility of OCLC
allowing duplicate records for the same item, one record cataloged according to
AACR2 and another according to DCRM. OCLC responded that rather than allowing
permissible duplicates, they prefer having the DCRM record, as the one
containing the most information, be the master record. OCLC wondered how
libraries would react to this change. A show of hands of MASC
participants was called for and a large majority indicated their preference for
the DCRM record being the master record. Some attendees asked to have an
OCLC representative at a future MASC meeting to discuss master records,
duplicate records and proliferation of records in the database.<br>
<br>
Glenn then issued this in May I believe:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span
style='color:#1F497D'> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial Unicode MS","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>OCLC</span><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;color:#1F497D'>’</span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Arial Unicode MS","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>s Duplicate
Detection and Resolution software (DDR) does not merge records if one of the
imprint dates is pre-1800, nor would OCLC staff merge records in this situation
unless it were absolutely clear that the records represented the same item (but
we would be willing to work with someone who had gone through the effort of
working out which were true duplicates and which weren</span><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;color:#1F497D'>’</span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Arial Unicode MS","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>t).</span><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;color:#1F497D'> </span><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:"Arial Unicode MS","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial Unicode MS","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial Unicode MS","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>While
the matching software used to load records prepared in external systems into
WorldCat is very similar to that used in DDR, it does not include the pre-1800
exclusion.</span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;color:#1F497D'> </span><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial Unicode MS","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>
We could consider some more complex exclusions that would be based on the 040
$e coding (e.g., exclude all with a </span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
color:#1F497D'>‘</span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial Unicode MS","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>dcrb[x]</span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;color:#1F497D'>’</span><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial Unicode MS","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>
code and its predecessor codes) if the rare book community felt this
would be desirable.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial Unicode MS","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial Unicode MS","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>It</span><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;color:#1F497D'>’</span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Arial Unicode MS","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>s certainly true
that a WorldCat record can end up with holdings attached that represent
variations of the item described in the bibliographic record.</span><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;color:#1F497D'> </span><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:"Arial Unicode MS","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'> OCLC
matching has not always been as restrictive as it is now, and catalogers
certainly may have chosen “close” master records and then made adaptations in
their local systems.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial Unicode MS","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial Unicode MS","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>The
issue of not recording an edition statement based on a reference source is a
very problematic one.</span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;color:#1F497D'> </span><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial Unicode MS","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>
Having an edition statement (even a bracketed one) would, I believe, prevent
mismatches in both DDR and Batchload; having that information in the “first
note” </span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;color:#1F497D'> </span><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial Unicode MS","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>(which
I assume would be a 500, since the 503 is no longer valid) is not the sort of
thing that is “actionable” from a machine matching perspective.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial Unicode MS","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial Unicode MS","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>It
would be useful to carry forward this discussion with the rare book community.</span><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;color:#1F497D'> </span><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:"Arial Unicode MS","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'> Nobody wants
to play “fast and loose” with record merging, but, on the other hand, I don</span><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;color:#1F497D'>’</span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Arial Unicode MS","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>t think people
really want a situation where there</span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
color:#1F497D'>’</span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial Unicode MS","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>s no attempt to match at all.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span
style='font-size:10.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span
style='color:#1F497D'>Glenn E. Patton</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Director, WorldCat Quality
Management</span><br>
<br>
I'm not sure where we want to go with this now. <br>
<br>
Thanks, Annie<br>
<br>
On 11/3/2010 1:22 PM, Dooley,Jackie wrote: <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Big questions acout which, IMHO, Bib Standards oughta have
discussions. -Jackie</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div style='border:none;border-top:solid windowtext 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in;
border-color:-moz-use-text-color -moz-use-text-color'>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> <a
href="mailto:dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu">dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu</a> [<a
href="mailto:dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu">mailto:dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Deborah J. Leslie<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, November 03, 2010 7:35 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> DCRM Revision Group List<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [DCRM-L] OCLC de-duping algorithms and dates of publication</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Palatino Linotype","serif";
color:#1F497D'>Thanks for Annie’s comment. I have mixed feelings about the no
de-duping of pre-1801 publications. Would OCLC really give preference to dcrm
records if they were to de-dupe? Even over pcc records? </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>__________________________________________</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Deborah J. Leslie, M.A., M.L.S.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>RBMS past chair 2010-2011 | Head of Cataloging, Folger
Shakespeare Library</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>201 East Capitol St., S.E., Washington, D.C. 20003 | 202.675-0369
(phone) 202.675-0328 (fax) | <a href="mailto:djleslie@folger.edu">djleslie@folger.edu</a>
| <a href="http://www.folger.edu">www.folger.edu</a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Palatino Linotype","serif";
color:#1F497D'> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Palatino Linotype","serif";
color:#1F497D'> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div style='border:none;border-top:solid windowtext 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in;
border-color:-moz-use-text-color -moz-use-text-color'>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> <a
href="mailto:dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu">dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu</a> [<a
href="mailto:dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu">mailto:dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>ANN W. COPELAND<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, 02 November, 2010 22:45<br>
<b>To:</b> Erin Blake<br>
<b>Cc:</b> DCRM Revision Group List<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [DCRM-L] OCLC de-duping algorithms and dates of publication</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>Interestingly, when we asked
about permissible duplicates (one DCRM, one AACR2) OCLC said they did NOT want
duplicate records. Instead they wanted to merge records with the DCRM record
surviving as the master record. So, why exempt pre-1800 books from the
de-duping? Why not work the algorithm to favor DCRM? <br>
<br>
Thanks, Annie<br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>