[DCRM-L] Deletion of copy-specific fields/data from OCLC master?

[Noble, Richard]

I take the "master record" principle seriously, enhance records
routinely--and delete copy-specific information that does not add to
general understanding of the manifestation (especially as regards variants
that can be characterized as states rather than evidence for different
issue, some of which I may add to a record as evidence for a general
note--call it "some-copies" information). My supervisor generally approves,
since a "master" record that contains truly copy-specific information is in
fact *not* a master record.

Not doing so leads to unnecessary duplication of effort on the part of
those who exercise conscious control over applicability of information
coming into their local catalog, and confusion when such control is not
exercised--confusion that may reveal itself to researchers (sometimes other
catalogers) who are make the effort to compare local records. For them, the
only usefulness of such copy-specific detritus is the evidence it provides
that a record or records cannot be trusted as the product of cataloger
judgment.

RICHARD NOBLE :: RARE MATERIALS CATALOGUER :: JOHN HAY LIBRARY
BROWN UNIVERSITY  ::  PROVIDENCE, R.I. 02912  ::  401-863-1187
<Richard_Noble at Br <RICHARD_NOBLE at BROWN.EDU>own.edu>

On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 1:47 PM, Ryan Hildebrand <rhilde at uoregon.edu> wrote:

> I’ve noted recent discussions on the topic of adding local/copy-specific
> data to OCLC masters in response to the discontinuation of Institution
> Records. At the same time, I am aware that some libraries delete this
> information from master records when encountered. I’m thinking specifically
> of copy numbers, bookplates, and other provenance information that does not
> support the bibliographic description or other non-local access points.
> What is the pulse of the group? Do you delete this information and replace
> the OCLC master, or leave it alone? References to relevant OCLC or PCC
> policies would be appreciated.
>
>
>
> Personally, I’ve always been hesitant to delete this kind of information
> from master records, because I’ve been able to remove it before exporting
> the record to the local catalog. My feelings on this are radically
> changing, as at University of Oregon, we are part of a
> consortium-implementation of Exlibris’ Alma, in which our local records are
> tied to OCLC masters. In this environment, other libraries’ local data is a
> constant problem. Yes, it might be possible to address this through display
> options (norm rules), and I intend to look into this further, but the
> consortium aspect adds layers of difficulty.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ryan
>
>
>
> ---
>
> Ryan Hildebrand
>
> Authorities & Special Collections Cataloging Librarian
>
> University of Oregon Libraries
>
> 1299 University of Oregon
>
> Eugene OR 97403-1299
>
> (541) 346-1844
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20151215/db166e5a/attachment.html>