[DCRM-L] MARC "Type" codes for MSS and reproductions of MSS

[Matthew C. Haugen]

For those who are interested, I had inquired with OCLC about this. OCLC has
issued revised versions of relevant OCLC Bib Formats and Standards
documentation, dated September 10, 2019, which helpfully clarify the proper
Leader/06 Type coding for online reproductions of manuscripts.

BFAS Chapter 3 (https://www.oclc.org/bibformats/en/specialcataloging.html)
Type code fixed field element (
https://www.oclc.org/bibformats/en/fixedfield/type.html)

An excerpt:
"For online resources,* including digitized manuscript resources,* use
codes *a*, *c*, and *e* instead of their unpublished counterparts *t*, *d*,
and *f*, respectively, because all online resources are considered
published." (Emphasis mine).

The documentation is revised at several other points to reiterate this
point.

Matt

On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 4:31 PM Matthew C. Haugen <
matthew.haugen at columbia.edu> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> MARC and OCLC guidance for the Leader/06 position for "Type of record"
> provide guidance on the use of  the Type codes t, d, and f for
> manuscript/unpublished text, notated music, and cartographic material,
> respectively, as well as for microform reproductions thereof. But I am
> finding the guidance on electronic reproductions of manuscript material to
> be less clear, and seemingly contradictory. I am wondering what Type codes
> other institutions are using for electronic reproductions of manuscripts?
>
> MARC format guidelines
> <http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bdleader.html> say: "The type of
> content characteristics described by the codes take precedence over the
> microform characteristics of the item. Computer files are identified by a
> distinctive Type of record code only if they belong to certain categories
> of electronic resources as specified below; in all other cases the type of
> content characteristics described by the other codes take precedence over
> the computer file characteristics of the item."
>
> OCLC's guidance <https://www.oclc.org/bibformats/en/fixedfield/type.html> says
> roughly the same thing, but then adds another detail not present in MARC
> documentation that seems contradictory: "For online resources, use codes a,
> c, and e instead of their manuscript counterparts t, d, and f, since all
> online resources are considered published."
>
> When we image manuscript material here, our workflow includes deriving
> "ebook" records for the electronic reproductions from the original catalog
> record for the manuscript. Type code is currently not being changed during
> that workflow. Also, changing the Type code value would affect faceting in
> our local catalog, namely whether or not electronic reproductions of
> manuscripts would be retrieved alongside the originals in searches limited
> by the format type of manuscript.
>
> Thanks for any advice you may have on this.
>
> Matt
>
> --
> Matthew C. Haugen
> Rare Book Cataloger
> Columbia University Libraries
> E-mail: matthew.haugen at columbia.edu
> Phone: 212-851-2451
> Pronouns: he/him/his
>


-- 
Matthew C. Haugen
Rare Book Cataloger | Columbia University Libraries
matthew.haugen at columbia.edu | 212-851-2451 | he/him/his
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20190911/37e2aee6/attachment.html>