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

[Carol Fink]

Bob,
For efficiency reasons I would be happy with the elimination of any
local information from master records. We do delete other libraries'
copy specific information from a master record before it's downloaded.
Our info is added after the holding is updated and before downloading to
our local catalog. When I need/want to know whether the item we have is
the same as another library's, I use OCLC to find out who else has it
and go to their online catalog. I can read any local information there.
Not as useful as RLIN records, but I usually find out what I need to
know.
Carol Fink
Library of Michigan
 
>>> Robert Maxwell <robert_maxwell at byu.edu> 10/22/2008 5:52 PM >>>

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 donot 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 (
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20081023/0e55e08e/attachment.htm