[DCRM-L] Library ID codes/$5 in master records

[Laurence Creider]

Bob,

I'm not in an Enhance Library, but it would seem to me that, regardless of 
what "standards" say, you are doing everyone a favor by deleting strictly 
local information from master records.  After all, anyone else using the 
record would delete the information before they used it, or even worse, 
not do so because they were told not to edit shared records.

Larry


Laurence S. Creider
Special Collections Librarian
New Mexico State University
Las Cruces, NM  88003
Work: 575-646-7227
Fax: 575-646-7477
lcreider at lib.nmsu.edu

On Wed, 22 Oct 2008, Robert Maxwell wrote:

> A related question for the OCLC experts in the list. I've encountered 
> the following problem from time to time when I've been cataloging in 
> OCLC over the last year and a half or so since the great switch from 
> RLIN.
>
> I think we all realize that there are many ways in which $5 or other 
> local information gets into master records, and not always or perhaps 
> even usually by someone cataloging directly in OCLC. Many records in 
> OCLC now are there because they were uploaded from a local catalog, and 
> sometimes these uploaded records become the master record, either 
> because they do not match against an existing master record or because 
> they are a PCC record and overlay the non-PCC master record. There may 
> be other reasons. In all of these cases local information potentially 
> wind up in master records, whether coded $5 or not.
>
> My question is this. When enhancing a master record, what should be done 
> with this clearly local stuff? Should it be deleted from the master 
> record? I'm talking about things like "Signed by Douglas McMurtrie" or 
> "Bound with X" (not so issued by the publisher) or "Library copy lacks 
> p. 100-150". When enhancing the record I've sometimes tried to divine 
> which library the local information applies to and then adding a $5 for 
> that library and leaving the field, but that's tricky sometimes. On the 
> other hand, wholesale deleting of the stuff - ? Yet it doesn't belong in 
> the master record. Thoughts?
>
> Bob
>
> Robert L. Maxwell
> Head, Special Collections and Metadata Catalog Dept.
> 6728 Harold B. Lee Library
> Brigham Young University
> Provo, UT 84602
> (801)422-5568
>
> From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Joe Springer
> Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2008 12:09 PM
> To: DCRM Revision Group List
> Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Library ID codes/$5 in master records
>
> I must be working with a less-evolved concept of $5 and Erin may well be correct.  MARC21 Appendix A defines $5 as "MARC code of the institution or organization that holds the copy to which the data in the field applies. Data in the field may not apply to the universal description of the item or may apply universally to the item but be of interest only to the location cited."   In my mind/practice heretofore I recognized that the data might apply universally to the item, but didn't restrict use of $5 just to data "of interest only to the location cited."  OCLC's bibliographic format instructions are currently written in a way that seems somewhat narrower than the actual MARC definition "Use for notes that do not apply to the universal description of the item."
> Joe
>
>
> At 12:40 PM 10/22/2008, you wrote:
>
> The library ID code indicates where the information applies rather than where it originates, though.  If a reliable date for an undated publication can be supplied from a particular library's acquisition records, wouldn't that be a general note?  A note in the master record saying "Publication date from [Full Name of Library]'s acquisition records" (without a library ID code) seems appropriate, since the information applies to all copies.
>
>   EB.
>
> ---------------------------------------
> Erin C. Blake, Ph.D. | Curator of Art & Special Collections | Folger Shakespeare Library | 201 E. Capitol St. SE | Washington, DC 20003-1004 | office tel. 202.675-0323 | fax 202.675-0328 | e-mail: eblake at folger.edu
>
>
> From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [ mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Joe Springer
> Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2008 12:12 PM
> To: DCRM Revision Group List
> Subject: [DCRM-L] Library ID codes/$5 in master records
>
> And there are other instances where $5 identifiers are appropriate in master records.  For example, you may find yourself doing original cataloging of a work that does not bear a publication date, but local records date the work reliably.  This could mean a note such as "Publication date from library's acquisition records. $5 [code]"  At times you may do original cataloging of a work that is not complete and about which you cannot find further details.  This may also warrant including in the master record information that would normally appear only as a local note.
> Joe Springer
> Mennonite Historical Library
>
> Joe Springer
> joeas at goshen.edu/574-535-7421
> fax 574-535-7438