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

[Noble, Richard]

If you do that with *all* $5 note fields you might lose one of my precious
gems--that is, when it's a feature of Brown's copy (and almost certainly of
some but not all other copies) that is the clue to variation within a
manifestation (issue, roughly), I will usually tag it $5 RPB. But perhaps I
shouldn't do so, as long as the note explicitly states that the observation
is based on the Brown University copy. I don't like such notes that leave
one wondering "Where did *that* come from?"

I'm too old now not to be bold, so I've taken to sweeping LC's local
collection (710) and acquisition notes (561) out of master records. If you
want such information about LC's holdings, search their local catalog.

Of course, our  opac doesn't even display $5 in its "regular [full,
labelled] display", only in our "coded display" (what others call MARC or
Staff or Librarian view).

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 4:21 PM, Randal S. BRANDT <
rbrandt at library.berkeley.edu> wrote:

> I've also gotten bolder with age and now generally delete copy-specific
> information from OCLC master records. I do make an exception for $5 DLC,
> however. Not yet bold enough to delete Library of Congress information.
>
> We also set up a routine job for our Systems Office to sweep the ILS
> periodically looking for instances of $5 that contain non-UC Berkeley
> organization codes and remove those fields, whether they be notes or access
> points, from our local catalog.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20151215/7f10cc62/attachment-0001.html>