[DCRM-L] ESTC and the revision of SCF
Elizabeth Robinson
vava_22304 at yahoo.com
Wed Sep 17 14:52:29 MDT 2008
Part of this afternoon, I've been reading the FAQ on the LCCN Permalink (see http://lccn.loc.gov/lccnperm-faq.html). While the 510$u's URL doesn't have to be the LCCN Permalink, I think it might be simpler to reference it since it should be stable. Notice that the permalink program searches both $a and $z of the 010.
You are right though, Nina, that there will be resources that even LC won't have (or won't have an online bib record for). The latter is very real. (No, we are not done with recon!) So in those cases, it would have to be some other institution's record.
I suppose the instruction for the 510$u could be left open ended, and those who chose to use the LCCN Permalink could, and those who chose to use their institution's (or another institution's) bib record of the resource could do that too.
Can anyone think of any unforeseen problem with this?
Elizabeth
Elizabeth A. Robinson
Team Leader
Rare Book Cataloging Team
Special Materials Cataloging Division
Library of Congress
101 Independence Avenue SE, mailstop 4376
Washington, DC 20540-4376
(202)707-3408 (work)
(202)707-2453 (fax)
erob at loc.gov (email)
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed are strictly my own
and not necessarily those of the Library of Congress.
--- On Wed, 9/17/08, Schneider, Nina <nschneider at humnet.ucla.edu> wrote:
From: Schneider, Nina <nschneider at humnet.ucla.edu>
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] ESTC and the revision of SCF
To: ElizRob at alum.emory.edu, "DCRM Revision Group List" <dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu>
Date: Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 4:19 PM
I like it. Here's a question, though: Does it matter what URL we provide in the 510 $u? In other words, it might be preferable to include the link to my institution's copy of Evans rather than LC's copy. But then what happens if my institution doesn't have a copy of the reference?
I realize this is in its preliminary stage, but it's something to consider.
Nina
From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Elizabeth Robinson
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2008 1:02 PM
To: ElizRob at alum.emory.edu; DCRM Revision Group List
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] ESTC and the revision of SCF
Just fyi. I needed to give some of the CPSO folks an update on our progress. In
explaining the 510$u idea Nina first mentioned, I created the example below. The
URL is the URL for bib records (LCCN-based) in LC's OPAC (Jain's
suggestion).
Present bib for an Evans title:
010 __ |a 65058528
040 __ |a DLC |c CarP |d DLC
050 00 |a BJ1597 |b .A25 1744
245 03 |a An abstract of the remarkable passages in the life of a private
gentleman.
250 __ |a 4th ed.
260 __ |a Boston, |b Printed by Rogers and Fowle for Edwards, |c 1744.
300 __ |a 192 p. |c 15 cm.
510 4_ |a Evans |c 5375
Same with a revised 510 (made-up subfield for the URL to the Evans bib record):
010 __ |a 65058528
040 __ |a DLC |c CarP |d DLC
050 00 |a BJ1597 |b .A25 1744
245 03 |a An abstract of the remarkable passages in the life of a private
gentleman.
250 __ |a 4th ed.
260 __ |a Boston, |b Printed by Rogers and Fowle for Edwards, |c 1744.
300 __ |a 192 p. |c 15 cm.
510 4_ |a Evans |u http://lccn.loc.gov/67004309 |c 5375
Evans' LCCN is indeed 67004309.
Perhaps this is a system-specific issue, but how would this display on the OPAC
side of the catalog? Would "Evans" be a blue hyperlink? Is that
anything that John needs to address in the MARBI proposal he drafts?
Elizabeth
Elizabeth A. Robinson
Team Leader
Rare Book Cataloging Team
Special Materials Cataloging Division
Library of Congress
101 Independence Avenue SE, mailstop 4376
Washington, DC 20540-4376
(202)707-3408 (work)
(202)707-2453 (fax)
erob at loc.gov (email)
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed are strictly my own
and not necessarily those of the Library of Congress.
--- On Thu, 9/11/08, Fletcher, Jain <jfletchr at library.ucla.edu> wrote:
> From: Fletcher, Jain <jfletchr at library.ucla.edu>
> Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] ESTC and the revision of SCF
> To: ElizRob at alum.emory.edu, "DCRM Revision Group List"
<dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu>
> Date: Thursday, September 11, 2008, 12:53 PM
> Hi, everyone,
> Like Nina, I loved Richard's idea, and it gave me an
> idea, too, but one that took me in a slightly different
> direction in my own "pie-in-the-sky" thinking. As
> I have watched these comments come through, my thinking
> about this has only become firmer. Elizabeth touched on it
> when she said that the ”...patron [should] be able to
> click on the 510 of Title X and somehow be directed
> [etc.]...". Well, isn't that the function of the
> 856? I'm envisioning a few scenarios here on how this
> might work out (and I do know that there are no more
> characters left for subcode use in the 856), but it seems to
> me that there could be two ways to go with this. One would
> be to make the _Standard Citations_ public (post it to the
> Web, including all the additions after the last printing)
> and have the 856 point to it. The problem with this is that
> _Std Cit_ is purposely limited and there are thousands more
> references out there than it carries. (Of course, if we had
> a wiki-style version, people could go there to add their
> "best shot" at a citation to their favorite
> reference.) So, the other idea would be to have the 510/856
> link point to, say, the LC bib record. BTW, this would have
> the effect of precluding the need for a _Std Cit_ revision,
> which would be a good thing (IMO) since one of the points of
> the brief entries is to help keep the record brief*. (True,
> the behind-the-scenes work [MARC] record would be longer
> because of the added URL, but this should be transparent to
> the user, who, if everything works out right, would only see
> a blue [hyperlinked] ref cit'n.) --Jain
>
> *BTW, the one-name entries were a legacy of the 1st edition
> and, while I don't like them much, they are few and
> manageable; any one-named entries that have been added after
> that point have been done against the guidance in the
> preliminaries.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu
> [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Elizabeth
> Robinson
> Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 8:44 AM
> To: DCRM Revision Group List
> Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] ESTC and the revision of SCF
>
> It's not a bad idea at all, Nina and Bob, but the issue
> of the hour about it is how does a 524 index in our various
> databases and how would a 524 interact with a 510?
>
> I think ideally we would want (this is pie-in-the-sky
> thinking probably) the "ignorant" patron to be
> able to click on the 510 of Title X and some how be directed
> to (or have a second window open with) the bib record of the
> resource, based on some sort of automatic link between the
> 510 in Title X's bib record and the 524 in the
> bibliography's bib record.
>
> The clicking on the 510 in Title X's bib probably would
> have to generate a command keyword search (or Expert search
> as ExLibris/Voyager is calling it now) on 524s. Similar in
> other ILS systems.
>
> We can ask our various institutional ILS/systems offices
> and vendors what is doable.
>
> Do we want to do that? I can certainly start with LC's
> ILS office. We are an ExLibris/Voyager shop, as most/all of
> you probably know. What are the other systems? Innovative,
> Dynix, ??, ?? I know they've been gobbling each other
> up, and I have not been paying the best attention to who
> remains. Anyway, perhaps we can do some representative
> research with all the current ILS systems to see what is
> viable.
>
> How do others feel about this approach that Nina and Bob
> have offered? Basically (if it can work technologically) we
> would be retaining our current citation forms as they are
> but routinely adding 524s to the resources' bib records.
>
>
> Also, if this is how we proceed, would we want to continue
> to create new forms with the current working principles or
> with the new proposal of fuller citations? In other words,
> grandfather the current list and make 524s to assist the
> patron with those but (for the future) create new citations
> that are fuller?
>
> Elizabeth A. Robinson
> Team Leader
> Rare Book Cataloging Team
> Special Materials Cataloging Division
> Library of Congress
> 101 Independence Avenue SE, mailstop 4376
> Washington, DC 20540-4376
> (202)707-3408 (work)
> (202)707-2453 (fax)
> erob at loc.gov (email)
>
> Disclaimer: The opinions expressed are strictly my own
> and not necessarily those of the Library of Congress.
>
>
>
>
> --- On Wed, 9/10/08, Robert Maxwell
> <robert_maxwell at byu.edu> wrote:
>
> > From: Robert Maxwell <robert_maxwell at byu.edu>
> > Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] ESTC and the revision of SCF
> > To: "DCRM Revision Group List"
> <dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu>
> > Date: Wednesday, September 10, 2008, 7:41 PM
> > Good idea! It would be great if the OCLC master record
> for
> > as many of these as possible had the citation form
> embedded
> > in it. And as new ones came up if the first person to
> use it
> > in a 510 added a 524 to the master record for the
> > bibliography the rest of us who come along later could
> use
> > the same form in our records. I think it would
> greatly
> > enhance standardization of these forms.
> >
> > In case people want to do this, I urge the authors of
> the
> > new Standard Citations to get a code for Standard
> Citations
> > listed for subfield 2 of 524 ("source of schema
> > used") (see
> >
> http://www.loc.gov/marc/relators/relaothr.html#rela524b).
> Is
> > the group working on this thinking of doing that? I
> hope you
> > will. The field would look something like
> >
> > 524 Cioranescu, A. 18. s. $2 scf [or whatever the
> code
> > winds up being]
> >
> > That way if there were some other citation form wanted
> for
> > the bibliography in addition to Standard Citations
> (maybe
> > this is some sort of medical bibliography and the NLM
> > recommended format for bibliographic citation is also
> > wanted) the field could be repeated with whatever
> citations
> > styles are wanted.
> >
> > By the way, I notice none of the codes listed at
> >
> http://www.loc.gov/marc/relators/relaothr.html#rela524b are
> > for archival citation styles, so the field is clearly
> being
> > used beyond the archival community.
> >
> > 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
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu
> > [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of
> Schneider,
> > Nina
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 5:12 PM
> > To: ElizRob at alum.emory.edu; DCRM Revision Group List
> > Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] ESTC and the revision of SCF
> >
> >
> > This also reminds me that Erin Blake of the Folger
> Library
> > suggested (or maybe it was a question ... this was a
> few
> > years ago at an ALA meeting) including a 524 note
> (Preferred
> > Citation of Described Materials) in the bib record of
> > standard reference sources, especially titles in
> Standard
> > Citation Forms. For example: Alexandre
> Cioranescu's
> > Bibiographie de la litterature francaise du
> dix-hititeme
> > siecle would look like this:
> >
> > 100 1_ Cioranescu, Alexandre
> > 245 10 Bibliographie de la littérature française
> du
> > dix-huitième siècle ...
> > 524 Cioranescu, A. 18. s.
> >
> >
> > I know that the 524 is meant for manuscript
> > materials/archival collections, but it seems to me
> that this
> > is an elegant solution, especially if the 524 is
> > searchable.
> >
> >
> > +-------
> > Nina Schneider
> > Head Cataloger
> > William Andrews Clark Memorial Library
> > 2520 Cimarron Street
> > Los Angeles, CA 90018
> >
> > 323-731-8529
> > nschneider at humnet.ucla.edu
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu
> > [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of
> Elizabeth
> > Robinson
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 2:57 PM
> > To: DCRM Revision Group List
> > Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] ESTC and the revision of SCF
> >
> > I meant to also respond to Nina's suggestion for
> a
> > 510$u for URL links. It is actually MARBI that would
> approve
> > such, although LC always has an opinion on all MARBI
> > proposals (so would definitely chime in).
> >
> > Nina's suggestion of a subfield for URL info leads
> me
> > to wonder if we might also want to consider a subfield
> for
> > these acronyms we still want to keep and input along
> with
> > the full title. Richard's last examples could be
> (making
> > up a subfield):
> >
> > 510 4_ $z ESTC $a (English short title catalogue) 510
> 4_ $z
> > ISTC $a (Incunabula short-title catalogue)
> >
> > Or maybe repeat the subfield $a (not possible now):
> >
> > 510 4_ $a ESTC $a (English short title catalogue) 510
> 4_ $a
> > ISTC $a (Incunabula short-title catalogue)
> >
> > That might be exceedingly valuable from an indexing
> and/or
> > maintenance POV.
> >
> > We can consider various punctuation too (doesn't
> have
> > to be parentheses). E.g.:
> >
> > 510 4_ $a ESTC: $a English short title catalogue 510
> 4_ $a
> > ISTC: $a Incunabula short-title catalogue
> >
> > Whatever we think will display to the public in an
> > intelligible manner.
> >
> > Elizabeth A. Robinson
> > Team Leader
> > Rare Book Cataloging Team
> > Special Materials Cataloging Division
> > Library of Congress
> > 101 Independence Avenue SE, mailstop 4376 Washington,
> DC
> > 20540-4376
> > (202)707-3408 (work)
> > (202)707-2453 (fax)
> > erob at loc.gov (email)
> >
> > Disclaimer: The opinions expressed are strictly my own
> and
> > not necessarily those of the Library
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- On Wed, 9/10/08, Schneider, Nina
> > <nschneider at humnet.ucla.edu> wrote:
> >
> > > From: Schneider, Nina
> > <nschneider at humnet.ucla.edu>
> > > Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] ESTC and the revision of
> SCF
> > > To: "DCRM Revision Group List"
> > <dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu>
> > > Date: Wednesday, September 10, 2008, 11:27 AM
> > > Richard just gave me an idea:
> > >
> > > Why couldn't we include a URL to those
> citations
> > that
> > > are online? I'm
> > > sure we could petition LC to include subfield u
> (or
> > another
> > > appropriate
> > > subfield) in a 510, so that folks who don't
> know
> > what
> > > ESTC, Wing, etc.
> > > could just hit the link to take them to the
> resource.
> > >
> > > Of course, the problem is that many of these
> > reference
> > > sources are not
> > > online, but we could take advantage of the ones
> that
> > are.
> > >
> > > Nina
> > >
> > > +-------
> > > Nina Schneider
> > > Head Cataloger
> > > William Andrews Clark Memorial Library
> > > 2520 Cimarron Street
> > > Los Angeles, CA 90018
> > >
> > > 323-731-8529
> > > nschneider at humnet.ucla.edu
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu
> > > [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On
> > > Behalf Of Noble, Richard
> > > Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 7:10 AM
> > > To: rbrandt at library.berkeley.edu; DCRM Revision
> Group
> > List
> > > Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] ESTC and the revision of
> SCF
> > >
> > > In an ideal world, the 510 field would function
> as in
> > ISTC,
> > > with its
> > > choice of expanded or condensed references to
> > accommodate
> > > those in the
> > > know and those not--and those who need a
> reminder.
> > SCF
> > > would be the
> > > underlying public and technical reference
> database,
> > not
> > > just another
> > > proprietary professional grimoire.
> > >
> > > The market we address necessarily includes (as
> Donald
> > > Farren rather ...
> > > sternly reminded us) users who may have reason
> to
> > consult
> > > resources
> > > outside fields in which they are expert at the
> > acronymic
> > > level. In most
> > > cases it is possible to provide an author keyword
> or
> > two
> > > and enough of
> > > the title (without abbreviations and
> over-concern
> > about
> > > length) to
> > > indicate the nature of the reference and to serve
> as
> > the
> > > basis for a
> > > reasonably precise catalog/database search.
> > > "Adams" and "Evans" and
> > > "Sabin" really must give way to
> something a
> > bit
> > > more self-explanatory
> > > and less likely to produce about 112,000,000
> Google
> > hits
> > > (result from
> > > search on "evans"). These traditional
> > citations
> > > may unite the
> > > cognoscenti who receive the posher sale catalogs,
> but
> > they
> > > separate us
> > > even from our colleagues the next desk over.
> > >
> > > In such cases as ESTC or ISTC, surely we can
> extend
> > this
> > > principle to
> > > formulate the reference as, e.g. "English
> short
> > title
> > > catalogue (ESTC)"
> > > or "Incunabula short-title catalogue
> > (ISTC)",
> > > both of which phrases I
> > > just cut, pasted, and lower-cased from those
> websites.
> > (And
> > > since it's
> > > possible in some such cases, we might encourage
> the
> > use of
> > > the 856 field
> > > or other linking device(s) to take users to the
> > database,
> > > or even the
> > > particular entry.)
> > >
> > > There will be work involved in revising catalog
> > records,
> > > though I
> > > suspect that many (most?) institutions that make
> use
> > of
> > > such references
> > > can globally update phrases in specific fields
> (MARC
> > hath
> > > yet its uses).
> > > I do believe that it would be worth the effort,
> if
> > only to
> > > preserve a
> > > little longer our ability to provide this
> information
> > at
> > > all, in the
> > > face of those who urge us to "get over
> > ourselves"
> > > and, I guess, throw
> > > over our more educated users.
> > >
> > > RICHARD NOBLE : RARE BOOKS CATALOGER : JOHN HAY
> > LIBRARY :
> > > BROWN
> > > UNIVERSITY PROVIDENCE, RI 02912 :
> 401-863-1187/FAX
> > 863-2093
> > > :
> > > RICHARD_NOBLE at BROWN.EDU
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20080917/8fae500b/attachment.htm
More information about the DCRM-L
mailing list