[DCRM-L] Concealed editions in OCLC - Shorter question

[Hartman, Laura A. (NIH/NLM) [E]]

Deborah,

You are correct.  Institutions that batch upload records to OCLC have no control over how OCLC matches them.  The match and overlay algorithms are so complex that even OCLC staff cannot fully explain them.  We are told to simply "try it and see what happens".

Laura


Laura Hartman
Rare Book Cataloguer
History of Medicine Division
National Library of Medicine
301-402-6170



From: Deborah J. Leslie [mailto:DJLeslie at FOLGER.edu]
Sent: Monday, May 03, 2010 11:23 AM
To: DCRM Revision Group List
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Concealed editions in OCLC - Shorter question

This is a really difficult question. Has OCLC agreed not to merge records with 040 dcrmb? If so, Richard should create a new record and in the first note, describe the visual distinctions between this edition and the other. The fact that the other master record contains matches of mixed editions can't be Richard's problem.

On the other hand, I write from the perspective of someone who catalogs in Connexion, and so choice of master record is made by a human. I don't know about institutions that catalog locally and then batch-upload their records; am I right in thinking that they can't control how their records are matched?

From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Richard Noble
Sent: Sunday, 02 May, 2010 17:28
To: DCRM Revision Group List
Subject: [DCRM-L] Concealed editions in OCLC - Shorter question

Sorry that I sent such a long and unnecessarily detailed question last week--I was too bound up in the book. Here it is briefly and generically:

I find out that book in hand is actually a 2nd ed., a page for page reprint, with minor variations in text and illustrations, of the 1st ed. The two have previously been treated by all agencies and authorities as a single edition. My library has only this copy, which I have compared with the Google Books version of the 1st ed.

The holdings attached to the principal OCLC master record for the book naturally represent a mixture of editions. Individual records (seen via IR or institutional online catalog) are in some cases detailed enough to identify a copy as 1st or 2nd ed., though copy-cataloging may mean, in many cases, that the description doesn't actually apply to the copy; in other cases not enough evidence is reported in the record.

What to do?

Case in point: Edmé-Sébastien Jeaurat, Traité de perspective à l'usage des artistes (1750) OCLC 13455452.

Many thanks --

RICHARD NOBLE : RARE BOOKS CATALOGER : JOHN HAY LIBRARY : BROWN UNIVERSITY
PROVIDENCE, RI 02912 : 401-863-1187/FAX 863-3384 : RICHARD_NOBLE at BROWN.EDU
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20100504/e5f2a563/attachment.htm