[DCRM-L] Subfield $5 / Several cataloguing questions

[Karen Nipps]

Well, David (Woodruff) and Katy (Rawdon-Faucett), when you asked these 
innocent questions, did you ever imagine such a multi-faceted 
response?!?! Just goes to show that cataloging really IS an art (if also 
a science).

And this is why I so rarely weigh in on these sorts of issues. So very 
much depends on institutional practice, local system operations, and 
individual interpretations. It has, for instance, been my experience, 
that the larger and more complex the organization, the more cautious one 
has to be about making one's records work ONLY for one's own 
constituents. This is increasingly becoming the case as OCLC retools 
itself as the single on-line national union catalog and Ex-Libris seems 
to be attempting to swallow up the entire international library software 
community.

However, in this case, I am going to voice an opinion and agree with 
Nina and Richard on the 650 score, largely because MARC21, as Nina 
points out, directly says using a subfield 5 is permissible under the 
defined circumstances. For those of us who load records into OCLC, this 
is in fact why the subfield 5 is so important, as it is a way to strip 
local headings out of exported records.

As for the 500 / 590 issue, it is dangerous to assume that most 
institutions out there use 590s. But whether you do or don't, IMHO, it 
doesn't matter that much - what is important is the language you use 
when inserting your note. And this is where the "art" bit comes in. My 
simple (!) advice is use as much language as it necessary to 
contextualize your own copy and to justify any added entries you make. 
More is better - but too much is worse! :) Granted, if you are bound by 
space limitations (either electronic or paper), that advice must itself 
be qualified ...

The 692 field is a local field (all X90s are). It is Yale's choice to 
use it. At Houghton, the use of X90s in bibliographic records for 
printed material is strictly forbotten. (Not true of other parts of 
Harvard.) Rather, a note is made in the 561 in the holdings record 
describing the inscription and a 700 is made in the bibliographic record 
with subfield "e"s and "5"s  added. 

Hope this rambling helps! - Karen


-- 
*************************************
Karen Nipps, Senior Rare Book Cataloger
Houghton Library
Harvard University
Cambridge, MA 02138
(T) 617-495-2509; (F) 617-495-1376

**************************************