[DCRM-L] Notes from 26 June ALA meeting on rare book cataloging in WorldCat

Wed Jul 8 14:14:17 MDT 2015

Dear DCRM-L community,

Many thanks to the 45 or so of you who came out on Friday June 26th to discuss issues related to rare book cataloging in WorldCat with my OCLC colleagues and me. It was very helpful to hear what's on your minds. I had said when I issued the meeting invitation (bottom of thread below) that we would report out afterwards and, thanks to Deborah Leslie's note taking talents, we have a good record of the chief discussion points. If others have notes that further expand on the issues raised, please send to either me or the list.

I began the meeting by listing our reasons for hosting it:

  *   Rare book catalogers have raised numerous issues over the years, some of which suggest a need for clarification of OCLC policies and practices: which issues do you see as being the most important?
  *   OCLC has a practice of collaborating with specialist cataloging communities (e.g., AV, music) and would like to do the same with the rare book community.
  *   The forthcoming end-of-life for Institution Records (imported from RLG's RLIN catalog when OCLC and RLG merged ten years ago) has caused concerns about how rare book catalogers can access other institution's local data to enhance their own work.

Comments made by attendees:

  *   Local Bibliographic Data records (LBDs) are inadequate for rare book catalogers' purposes because it's not possible to search other institutions' LBDs; thus it's not possible to make use of colleagues' enhancements that aren't reflected in the WorldCat master record. (This is meant to summarize extended discussion. If there are other significant points, please speak up.)
     *   Catalogers should start documenting use cases to justify this need.
     *   Catalogers should articulate the MARC fields needed in LBDs to express data for items, manifestations, expressions, and works.
     *   Catalogers need the ability to edit LBD data.
     *   The problem is exacerbated when an institution uses multiple OCLC symbols.
     *   A working group of some attendees and other interested catalogers could offer input to OCLC on LBD needs. RBMS should do this.
  *   Guidance on input standards for rare books would be helpful.
  *   It would be useful to be able to transfer data from one master record to another that would avoid the tedium of cut/paste, such as when an excellent record for a microform exists but only a poor record for the print original.
  *   A study of a subset of rare book cataloging records in WorldCat (those with added entries for bindings) revealed little evidence of consistent descriptive practices across the corpus of records (Allison O'Dell, U of Florida).
  *   The most important data elements in catalog records for artifacts are bindings, provenance, and annotations.
  *   Fear that the ability to batch load records will be eliminated.
  *   Loading records for archival materials is sometimes a problem. (Response: longstanding problem that has just been fixed.)

Questions asked by attendees:

  *   How can we get more copy-specific information into master records?
  *   Would it be possible to eliminate records for reproductions from search results for books?
  *   Would it be possible to put links in master records to holdings in local ILSs? (Answer: it's up to the library to add an 856 to enable this.)
  *   a) What about authorizing wider use of $5 so that more local data could be added to master records? OR … b) What about dropping from the master record all fields contain $5?
  *   When is it appropriate to add special access points in 655 and 7xx fields to the master record, whether or not using $5?
  *   Various questions about OCLC's duplicate detection and resolution protocol.

OCLC staff comments:

  *   To expand LBD functionality, OCLC would need use cases to justify the development effort that would be necessary. (The effort may be significant if it implies changes to the master record systems architecture).
  *   Contact your institution's OCLC contact person to participate in planning for transfer of IR data into LBDs. Each library must decide whether or not to transfer this data.
  *   It is desirable to have as much information as possible in master records rather than only in LBDs.
  *   $5: OCLC has implemented $5 in every instance where defined in the MARC Bibliographic Format. If there are other cases of a MARC-defined subfield $5 that we have neglected to implement in WorldCat (other than in Holdings), please let us know. Implementing subfield $5 in MARC 21 Bibliographic fields where it is not yet valid would be an issue for the MARC Advisory Committee.
  *   Someone expressed concern about FRBR links in WorldCat.org being imperfect. This is something we can fix if someone reports a specific case to us.
  *   Our question to all of you: With whom can we start to work on addressing other rare book cataloging issues in WorldCat? At the meeting we extended an invitation to the Bibliographic Standards Committee, but their bandwidth may be limited due to the committee's always overflowing agenda of standards work.

I suspect that more issues came up, so please do send your notes or add some comments to ensure that we have a good record of the meeting.

We invite individuals to get in touch with us if you would like to discuss solutions to any particular issues that you face. Some of the issues mentioned above seem to call for community consensus rather than action on OCLC's part, but we're interested in hearing your needs and perspectives at any time.

Best wishes to all,

Jackie Dooley and John Chapman

-

Jackie Dooley

Program Officer , OCLC Research

647 Camino de los Mares, Suite 108-240

San Clemente, CA 92673

office/home 949-492-5060
mobile 949-295-1529

John Chapman

OCLC · Product Manager, Metadata Services
6565 Kilgour Place, Dublin, OH 43017 USA
T +1-614-761-5272

---------------------------------------------------

Invitation sent to DCRM-L and RBMS listserv on 28 May 2015

Greetings, DCRMers--

John Chapman, the OCLC lead for development of metadata systems development, which includes both Connexion and Record Manager--and I tentatively are planning to offer an informal gathering at ALA (date/time/place TBA) with the objective of having a productive conversation about the range of issues related to WorldCat and rare book catalog records‹which range far beyond IRs and LBDs. There is no RBMS meeting that's appropriate as a venue for this discussion, since the Tech Services Discussion Group isn't meeting this year.

John and his colleagues who work on metadata products and services genuinely want to know what the needs are. Specific promises aren't feasible at the outset, but they definitely want to understand the issues. IRs are open for discussion, but we would prefer not to rehash the territory that has already been thoroughly hashed on this list. We know that LBDs don't replicate the IR functionalities. John is open to hearing about additional fields that might be added to LBD scope, however.

For my part, I'd like to work actively with RBMSers to identify ways in which we can clarify and document a variety of issues (e.g., bib input standards, deduplication, and whatever else).

We fully understand that there seems to be a prevailing attitude of cynicism within the rare book cataloging community about OCLC in general. We'd like to find ways to reduce that within the constraints of the possible. You can perhaps appreciate that OCLC has little choice but to make cost-effective systems development decisions that will benefit the members of the cooperative in the aggregate. DCRM-L conversations that have featured the idea that WorldCat can't be all things to all constituencies are on target.

It would be very helpful to know whether any of you would be interested in attending such a session. Please respond to me either privately or via this list, as you prefer.

Many thanks‹ Jackie

-

Jackie Dooley

Program Officer , OCLC Research

647 Camino de los Mares, Suite 108-240

San Clemente, CA 92673

office/home 949-492-5060
mobile 949-295-1529

[OCLC]<http://www.oclc.org/home.en.html?cmpid=emailsig_logo>

OCLC.org<http://www.oclc.org/home.en.html?cmpid=emailsig_link>/research

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20150708/3e6c4ee3/attachment-0001.html>