[DCRM-L] Non-LC classification

[Schaffner,Jennifer]

David, Ryan and friends,

 

I've largely worked at institutions that do not allow readers to browse
in the stacks. We've expected users to browse only in the catalog. From
the point of view of our users, I'd hypothesize that they don't care
where we keep the stuff; they want to find it and get it. Studies report
that scholars often prefer more access to more stuff, and economical
ways to make more rare books discoverable is very desirable. 

 

So one can imagine that economical numerical systems (such as that at
the British Library) allow intellectual access for users via the
catalog, and physical collection management for us by number order. 

 

That said, as a librarian who browses closed stacks regularly and
prefers it (collecting materials for topics such as bindings, book arts,
Wilde, astronomy, etc. to present to classes and donors), I mourn the
change, yet enthusiastically support it. 

 

One system would be better than many, but it seems to me that's more a
collection management issue than an access issue.

 

My two cents,

 

Jennifer

 

*******************************************

Jennifer Schaffner

Program Officer

OCLC Research and the RLG Partnership

650.287.2140

 

 

 

From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On
Behalf Of Ryan
Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2010 7:13 AM
To: 'DCRM Revision Group List'
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Non-LC classification

 

Hi David,

 

My institution has a history of using mutually exclusive non-LC schemes
and as a result we have fairly chaotic stacks. There are implications
for efficiency in paging, since different subjects and authors end up in
radically different locations with little rhyme or reason. But, since
paging from multiple locations is an occasional problem, and you stand
to save time/money on *every* book cataloged, it may be worth it, if you
can live without call no. browsing. I wonder if your system will allow
you to retain LC numbers in copy in a meaningful, usable way, while
still displaying your alphanumeric identifier for paging purposes?

 

Ryan

 

--

Ryan Hildebrand

Book Cataloging Dept. Head

Harry Ransom Center

University of Texas at Austin

P.O. Box 7219

Austin, TX 78713-7219

512-232-1681

www.hrc.utexas.edu <http://www.hrc.utexas.edu/> 

 

 

 

 

From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On
Behalf Of Faulds, David
Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2010 9:58 PM
To: dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu
Subject: [DCRM-L] Non-LC classification

 

Dear list,

 

I'm wondering what advice other list members might have about moving
away from an LC classification system to some form of alphanumeric
system. The pros seem to outweigh the cons with faster cataloging, more
efficient shelving and more accurate reshelving verses the loss of
browsing.

 

So, what are the list's thoughts on making this change? Has anyone
considered it and decided against it? All comments would be appreciated.

 

Thanks,
David.

 

David Faulds, Rare Book Librarian

Manuscript, Archives, and Rare Book Library

Emory University

540 Asbury Circle

Atlanta, GA  30322-2870

http://marbl.library.emory.edu <http://marbl.library.emory.edu/> 

 

dfaulds at emory.edu <mailto:naomi.nelson at emory.edu> 

404-712-2612

404-727-0360 (fax)

 

 

________________________________

This e-mail message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of
the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged
information. If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution
or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly
prohibited.

If you have received this message in error, please contact
the sender by reply e-mail message and destroy all copies of the
original message (including attachments).

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20100121/837f585b/attachment.htm