[DCRM-L] Question: Local notes in OCLC master records

[Dooley,Jackie]

One small correction: OCLC did not purchase RLG and/or RLIN. It was a
2006 merger of two non-profit organizations.

Jackie

-----Original Message-----
From: Laurence Creider [mailto:lcreider at lib.NMSU.Edu] 
Sent: Monday, November 16, 2009 12:29 PM
To: Dooley,Jackie
Cc: DCRM Revision Group List
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Question: Local notes in OCLC master records

I'm sure that OCLC went out of their way and tried, but the fact remains

that once again OCLC purchased a competing product that in many respects

was better and have replaced with something that is less effective.  The

same thing happened when OCLC purchased WLN and the BNA authority
system. 
I was verbally promised by a company representative who is still at OCLC

that OCLC would provide the same sort of authority control (100 + 240
and 
series validation).  Two years later, OCLC was unable to provide the 
service and gave up on the attempt.  As far as I can tell, OCLC did not 
even try with IRs; I do not remember being given any option.

OCLC is the big player, and we all benefit from WorldCat and OCLC's 
attempts to provide what we need.  The fact remains, however, that OCLC 
develops products that we do not always want rather than products 
that we need.  When libraries, particularly research libraries, are 
putting more emphasis on what makes their collections unique, it seems 
insane to make it impossible to access the local notes for special 
collections materials. The scholars working on topics will have to check

the catalogs of individual libraries.  Of course, if those libraries 
choose to use WorldCat local, scholars will be completely out of luck.

Off soapbox.  This is my personal opinion and is not directed at Jackie
at 
all.


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 Mon, 16 Nov 2009, Dooley,Jackie wrote:

> First, realize that I'm in OCLC's Research division and so not
remotely
> in a position to speak authoritatively about most aspects of WorldCat
> Local or any other catalog product or service. So I'm speaking from my
> own sense of things, not in any "official" or particularly
knowledgeable
> capacity.
>
>
>
> About all I can say is that incorporating the IRs was a major endeavor
> on OCLC's part because the RLIN record paradigm was so completely
> different from OCLC's master record concept-and I would hope any of us
> can imagine what such a core structural difference would mean for any
> major software environment such as WorldCat. As for making IRs
available
> for free ... as a non-profit cooperative to which it's essential to
keep
> prices as reasonable as possible, I'm assuming that such an extension
> was deemed not to be cost effective.
>
>
>
> Jackie
>
>
>
> From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu]
On
> Behalf Of Robert Maxwell
> Sent: Monday, November 16, 2009 11:45 AM
> To: DCRM Revision Group List
> Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Question: Local notes in OCLC master records
>
>
>
> It seems unfortunate to me that OCLC has chosen this model. For one
> thing it creates two classes of libraries where there really isn't a
> good reason to do so. Second, it discourages use of IRs (if you have
to
> pay for them on top of your regular subscription you certainly will
> think twice about using them-or at least your administrators will).
The
> IR concept is such a good one, OCLC should not be putting obstacles in
> the way of using them.
>
>
>
> While I'm thinking of it, another obstacle appears to be lack of
public
> interface with them. They don't show up nor are they searchable, as
far
> as I know, in the FirstSearch interface (which is our public view of
> OCLC), or (far less) in worldcat.org. At least I haven't been able to
> find them in either place. If this is the case IRs are further
> marginalized. The only place I am able to see BYU's institution record
> for a given master record is in the Connexion client or web version,
> which is not helpful to the public. Jackie?
>
>
>
> Robert L. Maxwell
>
> Special Collections and Ancient Languages Catalog Librarian
>
> Genre/Form Authorities Librarian
>
> 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 Dooley,Jackie
> Sent: Monday, November 16, 2009 12:34 PM
> To: DCRM Revision Group List
> Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Question: Local notes in OCLC master records
>
>
>
> Libraries that aren't ex-RLIN can purchase IRs. I would be surprised
if
> few have done so, but I've never inquired. -Jackie
>
>
>
> Jackie Dooley
>
> Consulting Archivist
>
> OCLC Research and the RLG Partnership
>
>
>
>
>
> From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu]
On
> Behalf Of Auyong, Dorothy
> Sent: Monday, November 16, 2009 11:31 AM
> To: DCRM Revision Group List
> Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Question: Local notes in OCLC master records
>
>
>
> Whenever we create a Master Record/Institutional Record combination, I
> have instructed our catalogers to remove all local notes and tracings
> from the Master.
>
>
>
> I seem to remember that 590 and 500 notes tagged |5 will automatically
> be stripped from the Master record.  Added entries (7xx) and 655 (form
> genre) headings coded |5 will NOT be automatically stripped and I have
> my catalogers strip those from the Master.  Without the corresponding
> justification in the local note, they are just bad "noise" in an MR.
>
>
>
> I don't know that the option to create IRs was ever extended to OCLC
> libraries or it remains a legacy of we few, proud and unapologetic
> former RLIN libraries <smile>
>
>
>
> Dorothy Auyong
>
> Principal Rare Book Cataloger
>
> Huntington Library
>
> dauyong at huntington.org
>