Present:
Sue Neumeister, Chair Rick McRae (Music)
Lara Bushallow-Wilbur (UGL) Ellen McGrath (Law)
R. Ellen Greenblatt (CTS) Diane Ward (CTS)
Don Hartman (LML) Lori Widzinski (HSL)
Judith Hopkins (CTS) Celeste Neyerlin (HSL)
Linette Koren (SEL)
Absent:
Gayle Hardy-Davis (LML)
MINUTESThe minutes of the 2nd (3 April) and 3rd (15 May) meetings were approved.
CREATION OF CATALOG RECORDS
Most of the meeting was devoted to a discussion of some of the catalog records people had created and input in BISON. After doing a title search for CIRG Project, Sue retrieved the record for the Autocat electronic discussion list that Judith had input.
Some of the questions raised during the discussion of that record and Diane's "record in progress" for the Electronic Poetry Center were:
245 field. What should be Title Proper and what should be Other Title Information? It was decided that the Listname should be considered the Title Proper and any further descriptive statement about the list should be considered Other Title Information. There was also general agreement that a 246 field should be created to generate a title added entry for the Other Title Information.
538 field. "Also Available note" to describe Usenet access. Should this note be tagged as 530, 538, or 540? It was agreed that the 540 example seen in one record was a typo for 530. 530 is labelled: Additional Physical Form note and a literal reading of the word PHYSICAL would seem to make that field unfit for a note relating to another electronic form. It was therefore agreed to use the 538 field, and to create an 856 field for access via Usenet.
It was agreed to drop the Systems Requirement note and to expand the Mode of access note to provide more information.
260 field. It was agreed that the "University Libraries" should not be part of the 260 |b. In fact, the question was raised as to whether the University at Buffalo should be named or the University of Vermont. In line with the "catalog from first issue" practice in the cataloging of serials, the first home of the list (Vermont) should be named. An alternative approach would be to name the University at Buffalo but to omit the starting date of publication in the 260 |c.
7xx fields. A 730 field for "CIRG project" should be included in all project records.
Personal name added entries for lists. Should an added entry be made for the current Listowner? For the founding Listowner? For any interim Listowners? This was considered a matter of cataloger judgment.
856 field. This field as currently displayed in BISON public mode is very confusing. The subfield codes do not display and the text in the various subfields display as one string of undifferentiated text. What is needed is for the Library Systems staff (or NOTIS) to provide display constants for each of the 856 subfields. Otherwise it might be better to provide the 856 for OCLC but to delete it from the BISON record.
Electronic location information. A location code has not
yet been created for Internet resources. When devised it should
be equated with the Location Name of: Access through Internet.
The Copy Holdings screen should be coded:
1U CN |a [loc code] |k For access;information;see;LONg view
The public mode display would read:
LOCATION: Access through Internet
CALL NO.: For access information see LONg view
SUBJECT ACCESS
The question of treatment of MeSH headings was raised. Currently we have no machine-readable file of MeSH headings that could be used to generate a cross-reference structure for those headings. The current practice in CTS and HSL is for each unit to delete the alternate subject headings found on the bibliographic records it uses, i.e., CTS deletes MeSH headings from its records and HSL deletes LCSH headings. It was suggested that as an experiment both be used on the Intercat Project records as a way of providing subject access to materials that might be rather specialized in nature.
Consideration of the use of uncontrolled subject terms in a 653 field was postponed for future consideration. Contents of that field currently do not index or display. What would be the most suitable index? Keyword?
GROUP PROCEDURE
In line with Linette's suggestion at the 5/15 meeting the non-catalogers and the catalogers were grouped in the following pairs to select and catalog appropriate Internet resources. The following pairings were made:
Minutes prepared by Judith Hopkins.