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

Mon Nov 16 15:32:46 MST 2009

Like Randal I can think of one occasion when what would normally be
considered a copy-specific note went into the bibliographic record, in this
case as follows: 500 $a Recorded in all reference sources as Anonymous, but
bearing in the -- library copy the inscription "Given by --- the Author Ao
Dni 15[whatever-it-was]". That was an unusual example, admittedly.

Cataloguing in what was then GEAC when I was (1995-1998) on Oxford's Early
Printed Books Project, we used the 852 option for copy-specific notes, which
could be opened up to a reader using the OPAC,  unless specifically hidden.
I find fewer and fewer library management systems being this flexible (e.g.
in a recent hunt for a new LMS for the much smaller library I am working on
now) and regret its disappearance.

Best regards

Jane Wickenden

  _____  

From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On
Behalf Of Randal Brandt
Sent: 16 November 2009 21:25
To: DCRM Revision Group List
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Question: Local notes in OCLC master records

Getting back to the original question (and ignoring, for the moment, the
subsequent OCLC-RLIN tangent), I agree with Richard. Copy-specific
information is just that, copy-specific, and, as such, does not belong in
the master record. The only exception is when that copy-specific information
is used as the basis of  description in the record. But, using copy-specific
information as the basis of description should only done with great caution
and cataloger's judgment.

For example, an undated book with a manuscript inscription that at least
puts the date of publication in the ballpark and can be used as the basis of
a conjectural date should be included. However, the copy-specific
information *must* be clearly identified by means of the $5.

260    ... ,$c [1910?] {or [before 1910] or [not after 1910]}
500    Date of publication conjectured from date of inscription in Bancroft
Library copy. $5 CU-BANC

[Obviously, in the above example, the book would also have to exhibit other
characteristics of the early 20th century in order to use an inscription as
the basis of a date.]

Another example is when the description is based on an imperfect copy and
the details of a perfect copy cannot be determined. The copy-specific
imperfection should be noted, again with $5 (see DCRM(B) 0B2.2).

Randy

Noble, Richard wrote: 

Quite simply, information that is inherently copy-specific, whether or not
of interest to researchers of whatever stripe, does not belong in master
records. Any record containing such information cannot be used for copy
cataloging by another institution without editing.

I hover in my own judgment about another class of phenomena: things about
one's own copy that are very possibly true of other, but not necessarily all
copies. In general this will mean noting a state in some element of a copy
that likely has a variant. The latest case-in which I plumped for inclusion
in a full collation note with appended $5RPB-had to do with a sheet which
had been perfected the wrong way round. It is possible that ours was the
sole copy exhibiting this feature, but quite possible as well that it
originated with incorrect orientation of the heap of sheets to be perfected,
a mistake which the pressmen might well discover and rectify to get the
remaining copies right (without discarding the imperfectly perfected
ones-it's too expensive to throw away that much paper, and it might be
impossible at that stage to print more copies of the other forme without
having to re-set it). Such a note can be worded so as to fit comfortably as
a species of general information in any other record; of course, when I can
confirm variants from other copies, EEBO images, etc., it becomes "some
copies (e.g. ...)". I do not include such things in anything other than
quite detailed rare-book records in which such attention to physical details
is to be expected.

I am confident that Deborah is lining up her sights on me, having read the
preceding paragraph.

RICHARD NOBLE : RARE BOOKS CATALOGER : JOHN HAY LIBRARY : BROWN UNIVERSITY
PROVIDENCE, RI 02912 : 401-863-1187/FAX 863-2093 : RICHARD_NOBLE at BROWN.EDU 

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 2:11 PM
To: DCRM Revision Group List
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Question: Local notes in OCLC master records

I thought one of the reasons for creating the ability to have institution
records in OCLC was so that such notes could be recorded in the institution
record rather than the master record. I gather putting such notes in the
master record leaves them vulnerable to deletion by later catalogers. At
least we are advised on OCLC-CAT by OCLC personnel that local information
such as this found in master records can be deleted.

Bob

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 McCallum, Rebecca
Sent: Monday, November 16, 2009 11:38 AM
To: dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu
Subject: [DCRM-L] Question: Local notes in OCLC master records

My colleagues and I are currently debating when to add copy-specific local
notes and related tracings to an OCLC master record, and when to simply
leave them in our local catalog only.  

At one end of the spectrum are notes that would definitely be of interest to
researchers searching in WorldCat (eg. "500 _ _ $a Wesleyan copy: Heavily
annotated and corrected by the author. $5 CtW").  

At the other end of the spectrum are notes that would not be as useful to
those outside our institution (eg. "500 _ _ $a Wesleyan copy: From the
Kallir Family Collection, Given in Honor of Barbara Kallir (Class of 1983).
$5 CtW").  

But what about cases in between?  We're trying to find a balance point
between providing useful information and avoiding cluttering up OCLC records
unnecessarily.

Do you have parameters for when to add a copy-specific note to an OCLC
master record?  If so, would you be willing to share those guidelines? 

Thank you very much.

Rebecca McCallum

Cataloging Librarian

Wesleyan University

252 Church Street

Middletown, CT  06459

(860) 685-3839

rmccallum at wesleyan.edu

-- 
__________________________
Randal Brandt
Principal Cataloger
The Bancroft Library
(510) 643-2275
rbrandt at library.berkeley.edu
http://bancroft.berkeley.edu
"It's hard enough to remember my opinions without 
remembering my reasons for them"--The Streets.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20091116/66d28055/attachment.htm 