Charlotte, North Carolina
November 4-7, 1998

• Where Have All the Wallflowers Gone?
• May You Live in Interesting Times
• Cataloging Computer Files
• Cataloging Internet Resources
• Non-print Serials Cataloging Workshop
• Sound Recordings Cataloging Workshop
• Subject Analysis of Non-book Materials
• Toys, Games and Realia Cataloging Workshop
• Videorecordings Cataloging Workshop
• Poster Sessions Report
• Perspectives on the OLAC Conference
• NACO-AV Funnel Project Training

Dr. Lynne Howarth, Dean, Faculty of Information Studies, University of Toronto, used the conference theme, AV Materials: From Library's Orphan Child to Cinderella, as an extended metaphor to examine the role non-print materials play in libraries. She traced their growing importance and acceptance by looking at the way non-print materials have been represented in cataloging codes from the 1904 Cutter rules down to the present AACR2R.

Dr. Howarth described how librarians' attitudes toward media has been colored by the "three Ds," that is, media has been seen as DIFFERENT for print resources, more DIFFICULT to catalog than print material and likely to DIVERT scarce library resources in their purchase and handling. But that view is mostly in the past now, as media, especially electronic resources, come to the forefront as accepted and necessary additions to libraries. The acquisition, cataloging and utilization of media resources will increasingly be an accepted focus for bibliographic activity and it is therefore important for catalogers and technical services administrators to move forward in this area-Cinderella must either go back to the scullery or put on the slipper and go to the ball! AV is "cool" now and media savvy catalogers need to seize the day and participate in the evolution and development of new cataloging strategies; or, as Dr. Howarth said: "Cinderella must morph herself into Xena, Warrior Princess of Cataloging."

As part of our morphing Dr. Howarth suggests that non-print catalogers rethink the goals of AV cataloging, review the structure of AACR2R and examine how descriptive methods such as metadata can interface effectively with traditional cataloging methods. Dr. Howarth concluded with a call to arms by saying: "There has never been a better time to be an AV cataloger.... THIS is the Golden Age of Cataloging!" Her reasoning for these enthusiastic statements is that catalogers possess a set of relevant skills that are in increasingly high demand. As such, catalogers are well positioned to manage the new information technologies which are becoming increasingly to a wider audience.

Return to Table of Contents

Dr. Robert Molyneux, College of Library and Information Science, University of South Carolina, took as the theme of his keynote address the curse "May you live in interesting times." Dr. Molyneux's goal was to point out the vast changes that have taken place in the last 500 years and the revolution we are experiencing in our current lives.

Dr. Molyneux pointed out that people like libraries, especially when they are well packaged; and, given the ubiquitous nature of computers and networking, the impact of libraries will increase very quickly Computers magnify the power of the human brain and so do libraries; so the power of the interaction of the two is simply awesome. The Internet is a library and we need to help coordinate its content so that users can see things that they otherwise could not see. Dr. Molyneux described the Internet as global, organic, and growing, and discussed the impact that digitization of our heritage will have on the sharing of knowledge worldwide. He noted that the efficiency of gathering information and sharing it between systems will have an impact that is hard to anticipate.

Dr. Molyneux called the Internet "the librarians Full Employment Act" and noted that the Internet is likely to become a true university of the common man. However, Dr. Molyneux cautioned that as we move into digitizing our heritage, we must not become convinced that all that needs to be done has been done. Digitized information is fragile and easily destroyed. Digital records are vulnerable-to destruction, to manipulation, and to alteration. New information capabilities constitute in Dr. Molyneux words: "A deadly serious business that may liberate us or destroy us."

Return to Table of Contents

Michele Behr of SOLINET gave a very practical and informative workshop on cataloging computer files. Ms. Behr restricted her remarks to monographic computer files. We began by discussing what a computer file is and the difference between definitions in AACR2R and USMARC. USMARC tells us to code an electronic resource based on the content of the file (type code e for maps, a for language material, etc.), and add a 006 and 007 as needed to describe the resource's electronic aspects. USMARC defines computer files (type code m) as: software, games, fonts, numeric data, etc. When in doubt code as a computer file. AACR2R still considers any content accessible via computer to be a computer file, so we use chapter 9 to describe all such resources.

Ms. Behr led us through all areas of descriptive cataloging using examples included in her handouts. She gave us a live demonstration of why the title screen of a computer file - though listed as the preferred chief source of information - is rarely used: it usually disappears before it can be read. The handouts showed examples of the information found on other prescribed sources of information including the physical carrier, container, and labels.

When transcribing the title proper Ms. Behr pointed out that everything, even the company name, should be included. This is a variation from what we are used to in video cataloging; Quicken Software presents Family Lawyer would be transcribed as is, but the video Walt Disney presents Cinderella would be transcribed Cinderella. We were urged to be liberal with title variations. We then moved on to the GMD and had a lively discussion on what constitutes interactive multimedia. While it was conceded that computer files (multimedia or not) are generally interactive in some way, we weren't able to reach a consensus regarding how interactive a file had to be before it could be considered interactive multimedia.

Edition statements also created a lot of discussion. A cataloger from one institution explained that they use the edition statement to inform patrons whether the program is for Windows or Mac. I believe they do this because the edition information is in the brief display so the patron doesn't need to look at the 538 to determine if the software is useful. This led to a discussion of when to create a new record. At present AACR2R requires separate records for the IBM and Mac versions of software, but that may change as ISBD(ER) recommends creating one record for both versions with two 538 system notes. It was also pointed out that if we receive a program in more than one medium (i.e., 3 1/2 disks and CD-ROM), and both run on the same operating system, we should create a single record and include two 300 fields or a 300 field with a $e for the alternate medium.

Changes may also occur with the File Characteristics field (256), which is required but controversial. Currently the choices are: computer data, computer program(s), or computer data and program(s), none of which are very helpful to users. The CONSER and PCC guidelines have both done away with this field while ISBD(ER) has expanded the list of terms to include things like: font data, image data, game(s), and word processor program.

The workshop concluded with a brief discussion of recent developments in the LC Interim Guidelines, ISBD(ER), and the PCC Core Record for Monographic Computer Files. Ms. Behr is to be commended for packing so much information into this two hour workshop, which she usually does in six.

Click to see workshop handouts

Return to Table of Contents

This informative workshop was presented by Joe Cox from the University of Toronto. As a member of the Faculty of Information Studies at the University of Toronto, Mr. Cox has a great deal of experience working with Internet resources. The University of Toronto has an extensive collection of electronic journals. The handout for the workshop listed useful resources as well as what we would tackle during the next two hours. The handout, along with other valuable information, is also available at the University of Toronto's website. The address is: http://www.fis.utoronto.ca/inforum/cir//aacr2r.htm.

Mr. Cox began the workshop by presenting a number of important issues surrounding cataloging Internet resources, including: ownership vs. access; collection development and acquisitions policies; the viability of cataloging Internet resources; standards for cataloging Internet resources; and, one of the thorniest issues, updating bibliographic information.

Individual institutions may take different approaches to handling Internet resources. For example, some institutions may use one record for different formats of a resource while others may create separate records. Whichever approach is selected, Mr. Cox suggested we need to change our mind-set when cataloging Internet resources. We need to stop trying to treat them as we would a printed book: the Internet is a different beast.

Mr. Cox shifted the focus to applying the cataloging codes. Time was spent comparing the sections that deal with computer files from AACR2, the OCLC manual (c1997), and the ISBD(ER): International Standard Bibliographic Description for Electronic Resources. A recurring theme during the workshop was that standards and codes for cataloging Internet resources are still evolving. It is a challenge to keep up with the changes and make informed decisions when cataloging these resources.

One hot topic was deciding what GMD to use. Some do not like the term available and would like to have more information at their disposal. In his handout, Mr. Cox included the list of resource designations without "electronic" in the designation from the ISBD(ER) list for electronic resources.

Another tricky area is what or how much information to include in the notes for access and for system requirements. Consideration must be given to the notion that a special system requirement today may be standard tomorrow Perhaps one solution to this is to provide access to the resource but let the site inform the user about any special software or equipment needs. Another thing to remember is that there are ways to quickly check and update the 856 field but the 538 cannot be edited as easily. This may dictate what information is included in the 538. A good rule of thumb for cataloging Internet resources is to look for stable data and use that in the records as much as possible. Guidelines for using the 856 field are available at: http://lcweb.loc.gov/marc/856guide.html.

Return to Table of Contents

Map Cataloger Paula Moehle and Cataloger/Map Cataloger Instructor Cathy Gerhart presented a well-organized and informative workshop on map cataloging. As a cataloger new to map cataloging, I discovered the information was designed to challenge and inform the librarians with no experience in this format and provide updated information and practice for experienced catalogers. The workshop covered resources, scale, projection and coordinates, scale exercises, measuring examples, and the major differences between book and map cataloging. The trainers distributed an extensive hand-out packet to help the presentation.

Essential tools recommended for map cataloging:

1. Cartographic Materials: a Manual of lnterpretation for AACR2 / prepared by the Anglo- American Cataloging Committee for Cartographic Materials. Chicago : ALA, 1982 (ISBN 0-8389-0363-0) (Check for a new ed. to be published in 1999). This source is excellent for creating scale information.

2. Map Cataloging Manual / prepared by Geography and Map Division, Library of Congress. Washington, DC: Cataloging Distribution Service, Library of Congress, 1991. (ISBN 0-87071-361-2) Also available on the Cataloger's Desktop! This source is helpful in creating bibliographic notes for the map record.

3. Natural scale indicator. An excellent plastic version is available for approx. $5-$10 from the Dept. of Geography, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's Newfoundland A1B3XP Canada. Heavy-paper version (no cost indicated) is available from the U.S. Dept. of Commerce, National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration, National Ocean Service, Physical Science Services Branch, Rockville, MD 20852

Ms. Gerhart discussed the process of map measurement and reminded us to store maps flat. There were 13 different examples illustrating specific variations in map measurement including maps that continue on separate sheets, maps of different sizes on 1 sheet, multiple maps of different sizes on the same sheet, and circular maps. Measuring from the "neat" lines on the map when they are included is important in determining size. There was an excellent and extensive discussion of the major differences between book and map cataloging. We were encouraged to use variable tag 006 when maps are included as accompanying material and to remember to add tag 007 for maps. Computer maps will have a map 007 and a computer file 006. All cartographic materials, including digital, are coded type "e". We also discussed the chief source of information and main entry and learned that the corporate body must be a map-making body to get the main entry, while the cartographer has to be more than the mechanical drawer or tracer to get the main entry. Since LC does not use the GMD for maps in their system, OCLC has asked that contributors not use it in the database. Ms. Gerhart indicated that the University of Washington has decided locally not to add the map GMD. We also discussed various relief illustrations on maps including contours, spot heights, shading, hachures, landforms, and gradient tints.

Although there was not enough time to complete information on dating a road map, the handout packet contained specific instructions. The thorough discussion and excellent handout packet (with several examples of MARC tagged OCLC records) provided comprehensive resource information to begin the challenge of cataloging maps. The session I attended lasted the entire 2 hours and the small audience of 13 participants allowed for questioning throughout the presentation.

Click to see workshop handouts

Return to Table of Contents

Presenting herself as a serials cataloger who fell her way into nonprint, Kay Johnson stated two goals for this workshop: to help those attending with coping skills for serials cataloging, and to provide an introduction to some useful resources. Since the range of experience in the audience was likely to be quite varied, she decided to "start with the basics and work up."

Even when using the current AACR2R/LCRI definition of "serial," there may be difficulty in distinguishing serials from monographic series or sets. Gray areas between monographs and serials are found with conference publications, loose-leafs (analogous to some electronic publications), publications without numbering or date, irregularly or infrequently published titles (e.g. textbooks), and short-duration publications from special events. If the stated criteria don't help you make the decision, it may be better to catalog the item as a monograph for the time being.

After briefly introducing the CONSER Guidelines, and their differences from AACR2R, Ms. Johnson described difficulties with AV and Internet serials. With AV serials, dates and frequency are often lacking, confusingly stated, or hard to determine. It may be hard to decide which sets of rules to apply, and how to combine them, particularly for provision of notes. In addition to these challenges, Internet serials have complicated linking relationships between titles. (This problem occurs most notably when an Internet serial changes title and incorporates the archives of previously published articles under the new title.) Management of holdings and union listings calls for fresh decision-making. Lastly, you may have to establish the relationships between articles published in their original formats and through aggregator services.

Common elements for serials records of all types include uniform titles, notes and subject headings for the whole title (not just one issue), linking relationships, and the need to distinguish between minor variants and differences which require a new record.

The audience then discussed several examples of non-print serials. These included a title in microform, a biennial map of Knoxville, a direct-access computer file (Cataloger's Desktop), and a remote-access computer file (a JSTOR title). Among the questions examined were the role of 538 notes, the content of which may change frequently, and the need to determine which source of information a digitized page image represents. Where changes seem to direct the creation of a new record, the general guideline is to wait for one additional issue and see if it is actually needed.

Ms. Johnson mentioned some of the changes in serials cataloging that may result from the work in progress following the 1997 International Conference on the Future of AACR. Rather than dividing the bibliographic universe into monographic and serial entities, we may be working with "finite/ongoing" as the primary distinction. Integrating entities, a concept which would include looseleafs and many web sites (including Internet serials) would belong to the "ongoing" category. It seems at present as though a new AACR2R chapter may be written for this purpose.

We also were introduced to the University of Tennessee, Knoxville's Hooks to Holdings project. This innovation provides access to journal titles and articles aggregated through services such as Dow Jones or IAC. The means of connection are brief machine-generated MARC records, simple to create and easily changed as the mix of titles available changes.

Finally, we examined a couple of ambiguous monographic/serial cases. The home page for the Cheese Reporter, when compared to a record for the printed publication, was judged to be most likely a supplement to the printed journal. Taylorology, a 'zine concerned with the unsolved 1922 murder of a silent film director, is probably a serial rather than a monographic series. This lighthearted conclusion demonstrated once again that serials, including nonprint items, provide glimpses into every aspect of human existence. There's nothing so esoteric that it can't be written about with the intent to continue indefinitely!

Click to see workshop handouts

Return to Table of Contents

Margaret Kaus briefly described her recent sabbatical at the Library of Congress where she cataloged LPs and 78s-the latter from photocopies of disc labels! Throughout the presentation, she offered observations of how sound recordings are actually cataloged at LC.

Though the workshop was geared toward beginning music catalogers, there was plenty of information for those with some experience as well. The bulk of the presentation was devoted to discussing a series of examples, each of which consisted of photocopies of a CD label and notes from the container and insert along with a basically complete MARC record showing cataloging for the material. The examples progressed from basic to complex: one composer, one work; one composer, two works (without a collective title); one composer, two works (with a collective title); one composer, three to five titles (without a collective title); one composer, six or more works (with a collective title); two composers (with a collective title); and, two or more composers (without a collective title).

Here are a few highlights of topics that came up:

• Level 7 records from LC can be enhanced by using OCLC's lock and replace procedures.
• Include all 12 digits of UPC in tag 024 (assuming your UPC has 12 digits).
• The phrase "Manufactured and marketed by ... "can be interpreted to signify distribution.
• LC will not use tag 538 for the "Compact disc" note.
• Though most current online systems provide direct tide access for subfield t in 700 analytic fields, LC's MUMS and LOCIS systems do not. Hence, LCRI (21 .30J), which requires that title added entries be made for any distinctive titles that appear in area one of the description when there is not a collective title. (E.g., if area one reads "Promethee [sound recording] : Le poeme de fue: opus 50 ; Symphony no. 3, opus 43 : Le divin poem; Reverie : opus 24," then the LCRI requires title added entries for Promethee, Poeme de fue, Divin poem, and Reverie.
• The potential value and current applications of several optional fields (e.g. 033, 306, and 045) and subfields (e.g. subfield 4 relator codes) were discussed.

• LC's MUMS database was recommended as the most complete source for LC cataloging and authority records, despite its "challenging" command searching methods.
• Several useful Web sites were discussed, including "Music Cataloging at Yale" at http://www.library.yale.edu/cataloging/music/musicat.htm and the "Music Library Association Clearinghouse" at http://www.music.indiana.edu/tech_s/mla/index.htm.
• In addition to the handouts of CD and cataloging examples, an additional handout (36 p.) provided field-by-field examples, description, and tables for dozens of MARC tags which are either unique to music cataloging or which have special functions in music cataloging. This latter handout was prepared by Michelle Koth and modified by Margaret Kaus. A separate series of exercises/self-tests is also available from the presenter.

Click to see workshop handouts

Return to Table of Contents

Heidi Lee Hoerman focused this workshop on the use of LCSH for subject access to pictorial materials. Her presentation provided an overview of some of the factors that complicate this enterprise, rather than a set of universally applicable guidelines. The result was an intellectually stimulating discussion which may help catalogers examine their own assumptions about their practice.

Prof. Hoerman provided a pithy quote from W.J. Hutchins: "The notion of a subject of a document is peculiarly vague." Subject, as a concept in itself, can be considered in three lights: aboutness, of-ness, and thing-ness. Aboutness is the most commonly discussed, but is nonetheless difficult to explain. In particular, the need to determine a creator's intentions can make aboutness hard to pin down. This is much easier when the creator of a work tells what is it about, but close to impossible when a creator uses no words. This, in a nutshell, is the AV subject cataloger's dilemma.

Of-ness concerns what an item depicts; thing--ness asks the question, "what is this?" Thus, Botticelli's Birth of Venus has been assigned the aboutness heading Nude in art; the of-ness heading Venus (Roman deity); and the thing-ness heading Painting, Italian. The borders between aspects blur. Thing-ness, for example, reflects back on aboutness, as can be seen by the different subject headings assigned to records for The Bridges of Madison County. Where records for the book receive headings such as: Madison County (Iowa)-Description and travel; records for the film contain headings such as: Love in motion pictures.

Other kinds of intentionality come into play: catalogers' intentions in indexing, which in turn is shaped by assumptions about library patrons who use the visual materials. As an example of this interplay, consider two contrasting subject headings for Joseph Albers' series of paintings, "Homage to the Square." The heading: Square in art; seems to be a straightforward description of aboutness (or is it really of-ness?), while the heading: Color-Study and teaching; may better reflect Albers' intentions. But should subject analysis concern itself with what visual material depicts, what it is, or what it is intended to convey? Is it our responsibility to enable or enhance the creator's intent?

Catalogers are concerned with "organization of information for effective retrieval," and to that end, we promote values such as effectiveness, efficiency, consistency, and acceptability Of these, consistency is central, the promotion of which depends to a great extent on the assumption that a perfect subject analysis system must exist, and on the naive view that the subject of a item is easy to determine. Against this, Prof. Hoerman cited research which points to a multitude of factors which mitigate against consistency, both between indexers and for individual indexers overtime. Textual factors include the author's vocabulary and style, clarity and specificity, and redundancy of information. Practical factors such as indexing methods used, constraints imposed on indexers in choice of terms, and aids such as the controlled vocabularies used will have a significant impact. On a personal level, the indexer's educational background, personality, aptitude for indexing, motivation level, health conditions, and judgment of an item's significance will affect subject analysis. Finally, environmental factors to consider include noise in the work area, climatic conditions, lighting, interruptions, time constraints, type of technical equipment, and workstation ergonomics.

Research has demonstrated factors which can increase consistency, among which are the use of controlled vocabularies and classification, indexer experience, length of documents and workstation comfort. However, there is no research to assure us that subject indexing consistency improves retrieval. Until more research is done, we have to accept that both indexing and searching behavior are indeterminate and probabilistic. In the face of this uncertainty, we need to embrace the three aspects of subject analysis outlined at the beginning, providing for each as appropriate, particularly for visual materials. We should embrace the use of alternative thesauri, such as the AAT, while watching for authority record conflicts. We also need to balance the needs of naive vs. experienced users and provide for each as best we can.

Return to Table of Contents

The workshop on cataloging toys, games, and realia was presented in three parts: an introduction to and interpretation of the Chapter 10 rules; processing and storage suggestions for these items; and finally a hands-on cataloging exercise (literally) using hand puppets from Ms. Olson's collection.

Nancy Olson began the workshop by saying that items such as puppets are non-traditional materials within the already non-traditional materials which make up audio-visual: "When it doesn't fit any place else, try this chapter [AACR2's Chapter 10, Realia]

When dealing with realia, the cataloger must be clear about what s/he has. Realia is a real thing: a frog puppet is not realia, it is a puppet, so its GMD would be [toy]. Edition statements on toys and games have become fairly common in recent years, and the cataloger must be keen-eyed to catch some of these statement terms. The most problematical area of cataloging Chapter 10 materials is in determining publication information (AA CR2 10.4). Is the item published or manufactured, published or unpublished, or naturally occurring? A book is published, a chair is manufactured, a game can be somewhere in between, and a rock is naturally occuring. It can be difficult to determine the publication information for an item which is cataloged as realia.

Physical description of realia should include how many what color, and what item is made of. While the list of GMDs is fairly limited, SMDs should be quite specific. Further detail can be provided in a note. Notes are extremely important in special materials' cataloging. The cataloger must make clear what the item is, how it is used, who might use it, and why and for what purposes it might be used. Ms. Olson emphasized that the cataloger should not agonize over cataloging decisions, and reminded us that creating a bibliographic record to provide access to patrons is better than leaving these items on a shelf where no one can use them.

Ms. Olson briefly outlined some processing and storage concerns. Every single item is unique, and requires special thought as to its handing. Tattle-taping can be a challenge for many items. Small items, for example, pose a problem since tattle-tape cannot be cut to fit them. In this case, CD-ROM security tape can be useful. It is best to provide Circulation staff with a note in the online item record giving the exact location of the tattle-tape. Ms. Olson prefers clear plastic containers for puppets and the like, with the barcode on the outside of the container. Maintenance can also be a concern: realia can attract bugs, toys get dirty and need washing, games need to be complete. (Tip of the Day: When adding an alligator skin to your collection, make sure it is cured regularly and properly!)

Lastly, workshop attendees divided into small groups to actually catalog a hand-puppet. Ms. Olson reminded us that puppets are used for purposes other than play and story-telling, that puppets play a special role in therapy for both young and old, and that the police force and other counselors routinely use puppets to help disturbed or frightened children communicate. Cataloging teams wrote out their MARC record on a transparency, which was then shared on the overhead and discussed with the whole room at the end of the session. Judging from the enthusiasm with which everyone threw themselves into this exercise, the workshop was quite a success.

Return to Table of Contents

This workshop was designed as a practical guide to cataloging videorecordings. It was not meant to be a comprehensive workshop. Instead, its scope was limited to discussion of the more problematic descriptive fields and to learning about new values and codes. The assumption was that attendees had a basic knowledge about cataloging videos including AACR2, MARC, and a "general awareness of AV Cataloging and OCLC Visual Materials format."

In the first forty-five minutes, Jay covered the intricacies of the sources of information for videorecordings, when to input a new record, the 245 title and statement of responsibility field, the dates in the 260 and associated fixed fields, the 250 edition statement, and numbers associated with a videorecording. A new development regarding which source to use when determining the country code in the fixed fields was discussed: it has been proposed that this field contain the codes for the place of "publication" given in the 260 regardless of where the original content was produced. This development is given in more detail in a current MARBI discussion paper. Also touched upon was the use of the 546 and 041 fields.

The remainder of the workshop was a question and answer forum. It proved to be lively and informative. Both Jay and members of the audience provided answers for the questions. Highlights of this question/answer period are given below:

Question:
What should the format wording in the 538 be for Digital Video Discs? Does it really go in the 538 field?

Answer:
Yes it does go in the 538 field. Either of the phrases, "Digital Video Disc" or "DVD" are appropriate to use.

Question:
What does NTSC mean and where does it go in the description?

Answer:
Jay or other members of the audience were unsure of the exact words associated with this abbreviation, but it is an American standard for videorecordings. It is similar to the European PAL standard or the Asian SECAM standard. If used, it should be put in the 538. Jay emphasized that "NTSC" doesn't have to go on the record if you are a cataloger in the US and cataloging a video made in the US. However some audience members thought that all standards, if given on the item should be put in the catalog record.

Question:
What about U-Matic? What is it exactly and where does it go in the record?

Answer:
It is the professional industry standard. It should be included in the 538.

Question:
What is done with "trailers" on videorecordings?

Answer:
It depends on the content. Some are previews of upcoming movies and usually the time is not included in the playing time listed on the video container. These should not be noted in the record. Also, some can be advertisements for the sponsor/producer of the video. Again, these are not included in the playing time. Catalogers should ignore them. Do not confuse trailers with additional material related to the content of the original movie or documentary. For example, a release of a motion picture on video may be accompanied by interviews with directors and actors, or give a history behind the making of the motion picture. This information should be included in the summary or another note.

Click to see workshop handouts

Return to Table of Contents

(ed. note: Confusion in who would be reporting on the poster sessions led to no one reporting on the poster sessions. Robert Freeborn submitted a brief report about his own session. A complete list of session titles and names of presenters is in the President's Column at the top of p. 4 in the December 1998 issue.)

Mr. Freeborn explained through a series of photographs the problems he faced in cataloging "Changing Africa: a village study unit." "Changing Africa" is a kit of 64 items, ranging in scope from books and filmstrips to clothing and musical instruments, that focused on a village in the African country of Liberia. The display featured pictures of the kit's entire contents, completely labeled, along with its original container. Illustrations of the finished bibliographic and item records were also included.

Return to Table of Contents

I was thrilled when I learned I was the recipient of the OLAC travel scholarship earlier this fall, and was even more thrilled when I arrived in Charlotte and picked up the registration packet. Finally, a chance to be in rooms of people speaking nothing but MARC! Coming from a small academic library where much of the non-book material is my responsibility, I knew I had a lot to absorb during this conference.

The workshops I took were: Internet Resources, Sound Recordings, Subject Analysis of Non-print Materials, and Videorecordings. I learned a great deal, both in these sessions and in talking things over with other conference participants.

The session with University of Toronto's Joe Cox on Internet resources brought up many interesting issues; I only wish we hadn't run out of time. Of particular interest to me were some of the collection development and acquisitions issues that he touched on, in addition to the perennial "should we catalog Internet resources?" question. Before this conference, I was more conservative and hesitant about cataloging these resources, but I think Joe Cox made an excellent case for cataloging this material and he in fact influenced me a great deal in this regard. The crux of his argument, that if we fail to catalog this material we will simply be left behind, is compelling indeed. In terms of the mechanics of cataloging Internet resources, he drew parallels between current AACR2r and ISBD(ER), the International Standard Bibliographic Description for Electronic Resources practices. He focused primarily on Ch. 9 "highlights" from AACR2r.

Margaret Kaus' session on cataloging sound recordings was also highly informative. She provided us with photocopies of cds and cd inserts and then walked through the corresponding catalog records. One of the ways I found this session most helpful is that she talked about her cataloging decisions while at the same time noting common approaches - some appropriate, some not - that she has run across in the past. This gave me a list of things to watch out for, both in copy and original cataloging. Music cataloging is tricky stuff; generic titles, odd series titles, lots of access issues abound. Another particularly helpful aspect of Kaus' presentation was her discussion of local practice needs vs. national standards.

The next session I attended was Heidi Lee Hoerman's workshop on subject analysis of non-book material. In many ways, this was the session I had been looking forward to the most. Cataloging anything is an intellectual undertaking, but it is the assigning of subject headings that can be the most stimulating - and confusing! - part of this work. At my job, we have long talked about "aboutness" and "isness" but Hoerman expanded this duality into "aboutness" "ofness" and "thingness." This session was very engaging, but the information that was the most interesting to me was Hoerman's discussion of cataloger consistency and studies that have been done on this. All of this is information that will be important to take back to my department with me. There were certainly some surprising things to learn, such as the fact that there is no research that has unequivocally shown that subject index consistency results in improved retrieval. Hoerman's session also made me realize that we need to more consistently look at failed searches and draw up some guidelines for increasing the use of form genre headings.

The last workshop session I attended was Jay Weitz's Videorecordings. I catalog a lot of videorecordings and have both needed and wanted to have a chance to hear what approaches other videorecording catalogers have taken. This session gave me a lot of ideas about creating a list of standards that all of our videorecording records need to have. Of particular help were the discussions of PAL/NTSC notation, the discussion of when to create a new record, and the ever-thorny issue of dates.

With all the sessions, the most helpful thing to hear was a repeat of Jay Weitz's "don't agonize" mantra. This made all the suggested guidelines seem a bit more flexible and easy to absorb. The fact that there were websites (cataloged?) to go with the sessions is something that will allow the workshops to continue in a sense, and to be shared with coworkers and others who were not able to attend. I deeply appreciate the opportunity receiving the OLAC travel scholarship granted me. This exceptionally well-run and friendly conference has been a huge boost to me in my cataloging work and I look forward to the next one!

Return to Table of Contents

Ten more institutions were added to the NACO-AV Funnel Project on November 7, 1998 at the OLAC Conference. Not everyone was a NACO-novice; Alice LaSota and Lynne Jaffe are already participants in the NACO-Music Project and Robert Freeborn is a participant in NACO. The first group was trained at the Denton Conference in 1996. The 1998 participants are listed in the table on the next page.

Ann Caldwell, coordinator of the NACO-AV Funnel Project, warned us all to bring suitcases with room in them to bring home the documention; she was right. We each left with a very large binder from LC and many handouts. She presented a thorough and intensive introduction to the guidelines and procedures for establishing headings and creating records for the Library of Congress Name Authority File. David Prochazka, Music/Special Materials Cataloger at University of Akron assisted with the training, sharing information about using an OCLC macro with Passport in order to streamline the creation of authority records in OCLC.

This training is usually done in 5 days at LC. We had a very full Saturday, starting with how the Funnel Project works, how to create and document headings for personal and corporate names, and references, and finally how to use the OCLC macro with Passport.

Each participant library is assigned a special NUC symbol for AV Funnel contributing unit and each participant needs a unique OCLC authorization used only for the creation of authority records. During an initial training period all records go into a save file to be checked by Ms. Caldwell before they are approved for inclusion in the national database. After each trainee has successfully completed a specified number of acceptable records they undergo a quality review; after passing the quality review he or she will be authorized to independently contribute records into the file. Both RLIN and OCLC libraries are able to participate in this program.

With this program Ms. Caldwell not only provides the initial training for the participants but serves as reviewer for contributors until they pass their quality review and become independent. A serious round of applause is due her way. I think we were all excited to go back to our home institutions and start contributing headings.

If there are any questions about the project, feel free to contact the coordinator, Ann Caldwell (e-mail to E_Caldwell@brown.edu or phone (401) 863-3716)