Please Choose One
What's New | Conferences | Newsletters | Useful Websites | Search | Home

OLAC NEWSLETTER
Volume 8, Number 2
June, 1988


TABLE OF CONTENTS

FROM THE EDITOR

FROM THE TREASURER

OLAC CONFERENCE '88 PROGRAM SCHEDULE

OLAC/RTSD PROGRAM CANCELED

RETROSPECTIVE CONVERSION OF NONBOOK MATERIALS

MEETINGS OF INTEREST AT ALA

UNIFORM TITLES FOR COMPUTER PROGRAMS AND SOFTWARE

RTSA/AASL/ACRL/LITA/PLA INTERDIVISIONAL COMMITTEE ON CIP FOR AV MEETING

MULTIPLE FORMATS IN ONE SOFTWARE PACKAGE

NEW ENHANCE LIBRARIES CHOSEN

MARC UPDATE IMPLEMENTED

AUTHORITY RECORDS CREATED OR MODIFIED BY OCLC STAFF

BOOKS OF INTEREST

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION FORM


FROM THE EDITOR

This issue focuses on meetings of interest at ALA, coding the 001 field for video sound (Questions & Answers), and especially, on the forthcoming biennial OLAC National Conference in San Diego.

Although ALA promises many interesting AV programs, OLAC has been reluctantly forced to cancel the Tuesday morning program involving an exchange of ideas with AV distributors.

The OLAC National Conference looks very exciting, with keynote addresses -- "The Powerful Act of Decision-Making" by Dorothy Anderson, Graduate School of Library and Information Science, UCLA and "Decision-Making for AV Catalogers," Sheila Intner, Graduate School of Library and Information Science, Simmons College -- workshops on cataloging unpublished materials, computer software, videorecordings, and packaging and labeling of AV, and exciting tours of audiovisual facilities. The speakers and workshop leaders include the acknowledged leaders in the field; the tours include the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences Library and the UCLA AV libraries. In short, the program promises to be very interesting and useful and a worthy successor to the very successful conference two years ago in Dublin, Ohio. Bo-Gay Tong, conference organizer, promises us an exciting and productive time at the conference. You also have the pleasure of Los Angeles in November -- sunshine instead of the threat of late fall/early winter in less equable climates! Be sure to study the program, reproduced in this newsletter, and to fill out the conference and hotel registration forms and submit them early!

The conference will be held from November 2-4, 1988 at the Pacifica Hotel and Conference Center, Culver City, California.

The registration deadline is September 30, 1988!

Deadline for submissions for the OLAC Newsletter, vol. 8, no. 3 (September, 1988) is: JULY 29, 1988.

Grace Agnew

Return to Table of Contents


FROM THE TREASURER
Catherine Leonardi


Reporting period:
January 28, 1988 through Apr. 11, 1988

Account Balance January 28, 1988                      $6,502.96


INCOME
     Interest on regular account                          56.39 
     Interest on CD                                      339.31 
     Memberships (8 new; 64 renew)                       945.00 
     Back issues                                          10.00 
     Cassette                                              5.00

     TOTAL INCOME                                      1,415.16 
						    ------------
TOTAL                                                 $7,918.72

EXPENSES
     Newsletter v. 8, no. 1 (advance)                    750.08 
     Index (includes $50 editor stipend)                 985.10 
     Postage for 2nd renewal notices                      30.80     
     Addition to CD account                            1,000.00 
     Bank charges                                          3.00 
     Marbi Liaison postage                                10.15 
     OLAC Conference Hotel (advance)                     200.00
						   -------------
TOTAL EXPENSES                                         2,279.65

Account balance Apr, 11, 1988                         $4,939.01 
 CD at 7.1% matures 11/88                              6,000.00

TOTAL OLAC ASSETS                                    $10,939.07

CURRENT MEMBERSHIP: 516

Return to Table of Contents


PROGRAM SCHEDULE
Decision-Making for A-V Catalogers
Online Audiovisual Catalogers Conference '88
Pacifica Hotel and Conference Center, Culver City, California
November 2-4, 1988

Wednesday, November 2

Thursday, November 3

Friday, November 4

Return to Table of Contents


OLAC/RTSD PROGRAM CANCELED

The OLAC/RTSD Program on issues of concern to AV librarians and producers, scheduled for Tuesday, July 12, has been canceled. We apologize to any members who may be inconvenienced by this and look forward to seeing you at other meetings, especially the OLAC CAPC, Business and Executive Board meetings.

Return to Table of Contents


RETROSPECTIVE CONVERSION ON NONBOOK MATERIALS

Sunday, July 10, 1988
9:30 am - 12:30 pm

Speakers

VERNA URBANSKI
University of North Florida
"Considerations in the Retrospective Conversion of Audiovisuals"

RUTH TUCKER
University of California, Berkeley
"Music Retrospective Conversion at UC Berkeley"

JAMES MOUW and ANNE WELLER
University of Illinois at Chicago
"Alternate Sources of Serial Records"

The program is sponsored by:

LITA/RTSD RETROSPECTIVE CONVERSION INTEREST GROUP

The program will be preceded by a brief business meeting to elect the Vice Chairs/Chairs-Elect for 1988-89

Return to Table of Contents


MEETINGS OF INTEREST AT ALA
ALA at New Orleans, LA

Friday, July 8

Saturday, July 9, 2-4 p.m.

Sunday, July 10

Monday, July 11

Tuesday, July 12

Check your ALA program for locations and changes. Remember, OLAC meetings are listed under "Meetings of Other Groups" in the back of the program.

Return to Table of Contents


UNIFORM TITLES FOR COMPUTER PROGRAMS AND SOFTWARE

In Cataloging Service Bulletin no. 38 (Fall 1987), pages 2-10, the Library of Congress has announced that headings for computer programs and software should be treated as uniform titles. In subjects, therefore, they would be assigned the tag 630 with a second indicator of "zero." Computer programming languages and computer systems (including specific model names) continue to be established as 650s with a second indicator of "zero."

Unfortunately, as this is a fairly recent change in LC policy, many authority records for computer programs and software are already in the LC Authority File as 150s, which translate into 650 subject headings. Mary Kay Pietris, Chief of the Subject Cataloging Division at LC, assures us that all new headings for computer programs and software will be established as 130s. These should not be reported to LC, as they are aware of the existence of this category of erroneous headings.

With these discrepancies in mind and with the relatively new availability of the LC Subject Authority File online, users should try searching the names of computer programs and software both by the new subject search key (5,3) and by the more familiar uniform title key (3,2,2,1). Remember that there are no charges for searching the Authority File.

Regardless of how the heading is tagged in the Authority File, users should tag them according to the new CSB guidelines: computer programs and software as 630s (see n86111217 as an example), computer languages (sh85027548) and computer systems (sh85104709) as 650s.

Return to Table of Contents


RTSD/AASL/ACRL/LITA/PLA
Interdivisional Committee on CIP for Audiovisual
Meeting, January 10, 1988 at ALA
Condensed Minutes

Bruce Chr. Johnson conducted the meeting since Bob Mead-Donaldson resigned as chair of the committee in November, 1981.

The primary topic of the meeting was the role of the committee. Marion Reld, RTSD President, had written a letter to Bruce Johnson and Sheila Intner. The letter expressed concern about whether the committee had completed its work. If it had, then RTSD was looking for a recommendation to disband the committee. It had not, then Marion wanted to know if it should remain as it is or migrate elsewhere.

Shella Intner presented the background of the committee and its goals, which were:

  1. to demonstrate strong interest and a unified demand on the part of librarians that LC make AV CIP a high priority.
  2. to facilitate LC's planning for AV CIP by answering certain questions
  3. to explore and advocate adequate funding for AV CIP

Intner felt the committee had accomplished the first two goals, but the third goal got lost in the shuffle.

Judy McDermott of LC explained that software had been the main thrust of the committee, even though the intention in the beginning was broader. Software was LC's interest, and LC could get support for it. The intent from the beginning was that this committee work with LC.

Intner asked if LC still wanted this committee. McDermott wanted to explore what the nature of the committee would be if it were made into a subcommittee of the RTSD AV Committee. Funding at LC is uncertain. It is clear that AV materials are a high priority for libraries.

The Committee expressed to McDermott an interest in having a survey done of LC's current AV cataloging process.

Verna Urbanski stated that Dick Thaxter has said at the last several meetings that he is concerned that this Committee be able to exert an overall pressure from the outside in order to increase pressure on the inside for funding AV CIP. If this committee moves to RTSD AV, that would be a principal function.

Several options for the committee were proposed. McDermott mentioned that LC already has an existing CIP Advisory Group, and she wondered what relationship a reconstituted Committee would have to the Advisory Group, which is a private group rather than an ALA committee.

After much discussion, Johnson listed five options (which are not mutually exclusive) for this committee:

  1. make sure there's an RTSD representative to the CIP Advisory Group
  2. have a CCS AV CIP Committee
  3. have a CCS CIP Committee
  4. have the Committee absorbed by the RTSD AV Committee
  5. become an established subcommittee of the RTSD AV Committee

Urbanski added a sixth option: leaving the Committee as it is. Swanson added a seventh: become an interdivisional committee, and an eighth: become a committee or a subcommittee of one of the other divisions.

Intner stated that one advantage of the Committee was that it was small and active, and visitors participated actively. It would be nice to have a committee or structure small enough to continue that mode of operation.

Johnson said that he would pass this information on to the RTSD Board. Members from other Divisions should do the same. If more ideas occur to people after the meeting, the ideas should be directed to their respective divisional boards or to Bruce Johnson. He will transmit the ideas to the right people.

Regular business. McDermott gave a status report on the software pilot at LC. There is little change because the machine-readable data file MARC application for which LC is waiting will not be up until this spring.

Peggy Johnson inquired about the packet of sample records that was given to committee members to examine. McDermott said that Dick Thaxter had taken the responses and that all of the comments were reviewed.

Return to Table of Contents


MULTIPLE FORMATS IN ONE SOFTWARE PACKAGE

As IBM continues the process of shifting from 5 1/4 inch disks to 3 1/2 inch disks, many software producers have begun to package together, in one software package, identical copies of a program in both disk formats. OCLC recommends that users prepare a single bibliographic record for such packages. Choose one disk format to describe in the physical description (field 300) and indicate in a note that the package contains the same software for the other disk format.



     300           6 computer  disks ;  $c 5 1/4 in. + $e user manual

     538           System requirements:  IBM PC  or IBM PCf compatible ; 
		      256K;  DOS 2.1.

     500           Also includes  identical software for IBM PS/2 (4 computer                
		      disks  ;  3 1/2 in.)

Other users who may wish to give prominence to the other disk format should edit the existing record rather than input a new record. A new record could be input, however, to describe a different version of the software package, as issued by the producer, which may contain only one of the disk formats.

--- Glenn Patton & Jay Weitz

From: Start of Message: Newsletter of the Health Sciences OCLC Users Group no. 46 (March, 1988), p. 10.

Return to Table of Contents


NEW ENHANCE LIBRARIES CHOSEN

OCLC has announced the fourth group of OCLC participants to be given Enhance authorizations. Twenty-eight institutions were chosen in this round. These include eight institutions in the non-book formats: Columbus Ohio, City Schools (CSS) and the University of Rochester (RRR) for MRDF; Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh (CPL), University of Maryland, College Park (UMC) and University of Oregon (ORU) for sound recordings; Detroit Public Library (EYP), University of California, San Diego (CUS), University of Oregon (ORU) and University of Wyoming (WYU) for scores, several institutions applied for AV format, but none passed the evaluation.

--- Submitted by Bobbie DeCoster

Return to Table of Contents


MARC UPDATE IMPLEMENTED

In mid-April, OCLC made available to users the changes to the MARC formats described in MARC Formats for Bibliographic Data, Update 15. These changes included a number of additions and changes to the AV Format to accommodate three-dimensional materials, including a method of dealing with B.C. dates and the extension of a number of archival fields already present in the Archives and Manuscripts Control Format.

In addition, OCLC included in this project the implementation of Field 256 (File Characteristics) for the MRDF format. Although this change to the format will not be published until later, OCLC users are already creating bibliographic records which require its use.

--- Submitted by Bobbie DeCoster

Return to Table of Contents


AUTHORITY RECORDS CREATED OR MODIFIED BY OCLC STAFF

OCLC has begun participating in the NACO (National Coordinated Cataloging Operations, formerly Name Authority Cooperative) Program. As part of the implementation of this status, OCLC staff in the Online Data Quality Control Section have begun to contribute new authority records to the national authority file via OCLC's Linked Systems Project Authorities implementation. These records, based on title pages and other information supplied by OCLC users, are created specifically to resolve conflicts or to clarify heading relationships within the OCLC Online Union Catalog. Existing authority records may also be modified as part of this process. In all cases, OCLC staff are working within the guidelines and practices used by all NACO libraries.

Once the new or changed authority records have been added to the Online System Authority File, necessary changes to bibliographic records are made. New authority records can be identified by the presence of OCLC's NUC symbol "OCoLC" in subfields 'a' and 'c' of field 040. Existing authority records which have been modified are identified by the presence of "OCoLC" in subfield 'd' of field 040.

For examples of new authority records, search these Authority Record Control Numbers: no88000112, no88000115, no88000120, no88000131, no88000132, no88000133, and no88000154. For examples of changed authority records, search these ARCNs: n79011824 and n82049244.

In accordance with this change in OCLC's status, new instructions for reporting additions and corrections to the Online System Authority File are being prepared for OCLC Authority File: User Manual and for Cataloging: User Manual. These instructions will be issued as a Technical Bulletin.

--- Submitted by Bobbie DeCoster

Return to Table of Contents


BOOKS OF INTEREST

Worth Noting: Editorials, Letters, an interview, and Bibliography By Sanford Berman. Jefferson, N.C.: McFarland, 1988. Price: 18.95. ISBN: 0-89950-304-1. 176 p.

Reviewed by
Barry Zaslow
Miami University Libraries

**********************************************

Policy and Practice in Bibliographic Control of Nonbook Media. Edited by Sheila S. Intner and Richard P. Smiraglia . Chicago : American Library Association, 1987. $24.95. ISBN: 0-83890-468-8. 256 p.

Reviewed by
Verna Urbanski

**********************************************

Computer Software Cataloging: Techniques and Examples. by Deanne Holzberlein. New York: Haworth Press, 1986. ISBN: 0-86656-411-2. 83 p. Also published as: Cataloging & Classification Quarterly vol. 6, no. 2 (Winter 1985/86). Haworth Press

Reviewed by
Nancy B. Olson
Professor,
Mankato State University

**********************************************

Cataloging Music: A Manual for Use with AACR2. by Richard P. Smiraglia. Edited by Edward Swanson. 2nd ed. Lake Crystal, Minn.: Soldier Creek Press, 1986. lSBN: 0-936996-19-6. 181 p. $35.00

Barry Zaslow
Music/Media Catalog Librarian
Miami University Libraries

Return to Table of Contents


QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
by
VERNA URBANSKI

QUESTION: I do original cataloging of AV media in a community college. I would like to classify material so all formats, including books, could be shelved together. How do I manage this, however, with items such as the book and videocassette versions of Under Milkwood? The main entry for the book would be Dylan Thomas as author, while the videocassette would receive a title main entry. How do I manage the call number (including cutter number) so that it would be housed next to the book of the same title?

ANSWER: If you want to intershelve all materials, classify the books as appropriate and then use the same number with appropriate variant for the video/slide/audiotape version. This way each call number will be unique if your agency goes to an online catalog. Preferring to have the video version of something at the same number as the text means you will compromise on the general rule of cuttering by main entry. There also is the issue of using the same number for an item that really isn't the same. For example, the video version of a Shakespeare play probably isn't the same as the text of the play. There is nothing wrong with doing this when it fits local needs. Be sure to document what you're doing, with your rationale. That will help managers who follow to know what you were doing and why.
--- Urbanski

QUESTION: Increasingly I am finding records on OCLC for videos with no 007 and only 1/2 in. in the 300 field. Since we cannot tell if it is a VHS or BETA, should we input a new record for our format, or use what is there and make changes as necessary? I am also seeing 300s with VHS and 1/2 in. but the 001 has a subfield e coded "n." It seems that users are trying to do their own version of generic records. Could you offer some help on these concerns?

ANSWER: It is often difficult to tell, when examining these records, whether the library doesn't understand some essential points of video cataloging or whether these are simply errors. In either case, OCLC users should follow usual procedures in reporting errors to OCLC. OCLC staff will contact the institution to determine if corrections should be made, records merged, etc.

Keep in mind also in evaluating the coding of subfield e of field 001 that, prior to 1985 September, value "n" was the correct coding for all videorecordings.
--- Glenn Patton

QUESTION: Could we see some samples of computer software cataloged using the Chapter 9 draft revision? I am particularly confused about Area 3.

ANSWER: LC is not yet generating MARC records for microcomputer software, but OCLC's Online Data Quality Control Section is inputting CIP which LC has completed. Some samples are at: #15498908, #16313206, #15976499, #15910130, LCCN 87-3444, LCCN 87-5925. Note that reviewing these records won't help on applying Area 3. LC will not be using Area 3 for the most part. They have concluded that it is not particularly helpful. The one time Area 3 must be used is when cataloging remote access files for which no physical description can be provided.
--- Urbanski w/ Thaxter

QUESTION: I have received a set of slides which are intended to be inserted into an earlier set so that a new updated version is the result. There are both replacement slides and new slides being added. The slides are accompanied by a replacement set of sound cassettes, a new instructor's manual and a new instructor's sheet. How should I handle this? (Reconstructed from a telephone call)

ANSWER: If doesn't make much sense to just catalog the slides on their own, nor does it seem reasonable to add them as accompanying material to the old set. I suggest that you integrate the replacement slides per the publisher's instructions and catalog the resulting set as a new edition. Provide a note that will explain the relationship to the earlier version. I would discard the replaced slides. I would withdraw the earlier bibliographical record and reduce the statistical count. If it looks like the publisher Is planning to continue this approach, you could treat the title following the "loose-leaf for updating" approach. I am not sure how satisfactory this would be with a set of slides, or what hidden ramifications there might be to doing it that way. (Readers--see OCLC #8920565 and #16644234)
--- Urbanski

QUESTION: I notice that a lot of libraries put the technical specifications at the end of the extent of item area (EX: 1 videocassette (VHS) (60 min.)) Is this correct? At my institution, we still use the note area for this information.

ANSWER: AACR2 caused a bit of a scramble in recording this information. Following 1.5B1, agencies could put this information following the extent of item area or as a note depending on the circumstances. Vol. 1, no. 4, p. 14 of the OLAC Newsletter still provides LC's current position on the treatment of this information. LC puts technical specifications in a note. In my own cataloging, I always use the first note position to describe the format. Ben Tucker, Chief, Office of Descriptive Cataloging Policy at LC, counsels that in the latest revisions of AACR2 submitted for the upcoming consolidated edition "such information has been weeded out of the 300 field."
--- Urbanski w/ Tucker

QUESTION: I need help applying $i in the 007 field for videorecordings, "kind of sound." If the only characteristic listed on the videocassette is "hi-fi" how should subfield i be coded? Some OCLC members are putting "hi-fi" in the 300 field. What's going on? Fidelity is nice in a marriage, but does it belong in a 300 field?

ANSWER: If all the videocassette says is "hi-fi," I would code the subfield i as "u" for unknown. I see this as a parallel situation to the guidance for describing sound discs; that is, if it doesn't say "mono." or "stereo." on the item, don't guess. I would not put "hi-fi" in the 300. "Hi-fi" is descriptive of the quality of the sound reproduction provided, indicating the purity of the range of sound. It is not descriptive of the number of channels on which sound has been recorded. It is my understanding that the physical description should reflect this latter characteristic. In both the 001 and the 300, I would limit my coding to what I can verify from the item. Also, AACR2 revised will have trade names coming out of the physical description, so terms like Beta, VHS, Laservision, and Hi-fi will be in a note rather than in the 300 field.

Below are a few examples of sound statements taken from videocassettes in a local video store, and how I would treat them in the subfield of the 007 and in the physical description. Please note that for OCLC users, the area we're looking at is the $i subfield of the 007. For RLIN users it is "KS."

I wrote Glenn Patton (OCLC), Ed Glazier (RLIN) and Dick Thaxter (LC) to see what they thought of the code assignment I provided. Reviews by OCLC and RLIN were mixed. Dick Thaxter agreed with the code assignments. Here's a summary of their comments.
--- Urbanski

  1. does hi-fi imply stereo?

    No, I think hi-fi without stereo implies mono. --EG

    "Hi-fi" does not necessarily imply stereo. It may well just mean better quality monaural sound. --GP and Jay Weitz

  2. Does the coding of stereo/mono compatible (k) seem correct?

    Yes, I think your examples that say stereo and mono compatible would qualify as mixed. --EG

    "Mixed" should mean more than one kind of sound in the sense of some portions in stereo and some portions in mono. In the "Dolby stereo, mono compatible" example, code $i as 's' with " Mono compatible" note. --GP/JW

    After reading the GP/JW explanation, I think I agree with a coding of 's' rather than 'k.' --VU

  3. How is it best to code "surround sound," with 's' or 'q'?

    I think it's 'q'--"multichannel, surround, or quadraphonic.'" --EG

    The definition of code 'q' includes surround sound, so code $i as 'q' in those cases. We don't think one can include "surround" in the 300 subfield b though. We'd opt for a quoted note. --GP/JW

    "Surround sound" is probably just hype. There isn't as far as I know any home sound system that can produce more than stereo. I would code for stereo as you have done, 's' for stereo. --DT

  4. What do you make of "VHS hi-fi stereo playback, requires VHS Hi-fi VCR"? Would it mean that there is only a stereo track?

    Yes, we agree. --GP/JW

    Not sure, but that sounds right. Of course, most "stereo only" tapes will still play on mono machines. I am unsure if this is something different. --EG

  5. What is meant by "this videotape has been digitally mastered onto hi-fi." Are they talking about tape quality (hi-fi)?

    I don't think there are values yet for digital video recordings, although there are now values for digital audio recordings. There will be a new byte of the recordings 007 that includes digital techniques. --EG

    "Digitally mastered onto hi-fi" sounds like PR. --GP/JW


Statement on cassette                        007/08                    300
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Stereo Beta hi-fi"                          $i  s                 sd. (stereo.)

"Hi-fi stereo"                               $i  s                 sd. (stereo.)

"Dolby stereo,                               $i  s (k)             sd. (stereo.) 
mono compatible"                                 "Mono compatible" in a note.

"Digital audio (hi-fi stereo"                $i  s                 sd. (stereo.)

"VHS hi-fi monaural"                         $i  m                 sd. (mono.)

"Hi-fi mono"                                 $i  m                 sd. (mono.)

"VHS hi-fi stereo Dolby                      $i  s (k)             sd.  (stereo.) 
stereo on linear track                           "Mono compatible" in a note
mono-compatible" 

"VHS hi-fi stereo surround                   $i  s (q)             sd.  (stereo.)                          
Dolby system on linear tracks"

"Hi-fi stereo"                               $i  s                 sd. (stereo.)

"VHS Hi-fi"                                  $i  u                 sd.

Recorded in hi-fi"                           $i  u                 sd.

"VHS hi-fi stereo playback                   $i  s                 sd. (stereo.) 
requires stereo VHS Hi-Fi VCR"                   "Requires stereo VHS Hi-FI VCR 
						 for playing" in a note

"VHS hi-fi Dolby system on                   $i  u                 sd. 
linear tracks"
							   
"Hi-fi Dolby surround                        $i  s  (q)            sd. (stereo.)        
stereo--this videotape has 
been digitally mastered 
onto hi-fi" 

Return to Table of Contents


MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION FORM

Membership in Online Audiovisual Catalogers is available for single or multiple years. The membership year is from January 1 through December 31. Membership includes a subscription to OLAC Newsletter. Membership rates are:


		 single year - US - $7.00 personal ; $13.00 institutional 
			   Non-US - $9.00 personal ; $15.00 institutional

		 two year -   US - $13.00 personal ; $25.00 institutional 
			  Non-US - $17.00 personal ; $29.00 institutional 

		 three year - US - $18.00 personal ; $36.00 institutional
			  Non-US - $24.00 personal ; $42.00 institutional 

Payment in US funds only, please. Make check payable to ONLINE AUDIOVISUAL CATALOGERS and mail to:

Catherine Leonardi
OLAC Treasurer
3604 Suffolk
Durham, NC 27707

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

TO APPLY FOR MEMBERSHIP IN OLAC OR TO RENEW YOUR MEMBERSHIP XEROX THE FORM BELOW AND SEND IT TO THE OLAC TREASURER

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Circle the correct information:


	I wish to ( renew my membership in // join ) OLAC

	I am enclosing :     $7    $9   $13  $15       for 1988
			     $13   $17  $25  $29       for 1988/1989      
			     $18   $24  $36  $42       for 1988/1989/1990

CHECK HERE IF YOU DO NOT WANT YOUR NAME ON A MAILING LIST WHICH IS OCCASIONALLY SOLD TO AV RELATED ORGANIZATIONS ___

NAME:
ADDRESS:


CHECK ONE:
_____ PERSONAL
_____ INSTITUTIONAL

Return to Table of Contents


The OLAC NEWSLETTER

is a quarterly publication of Online Audiovisual Cataloger, Inc. appearing in March, June, September, and December.

Missing issues must be claimed no later than three months after the month of issue. Claiming deadlines are: June 30 (March issue); September 30 (June issue); December 31 (September issue); and March 31 (December issue.)

ISSN: 0739-1153


OLAC Newsletter EDITORIAL STAFF



 
	  EDITOR-IN-CHIEF                   CLAIMS, BACK ISSUES, SUBSCRIPTIONS
	     Grace Agnew                       Catherine Leonardi
	     1903 Edinburgh Terrace            OLAC Treasurer
	     Atlanta, GA  30307                3604 Suffolk
					       Durham, NC  27707

	  NEWS AND ARTICLES EDITOR          CONFERENCE REPORTS EDITOR
	     Barbara L. DeCoster               Anna S. (Bobby) Ferguson
	     Library Media Center              Louisiana State Library
	     Bellvue Community College         760 Riverside North
	     300 Landerholm Circle S.E.        Baton Rouge, LA  70821
	     Bellvue, WA  98007                               

	  BOOK REVIEW EDITOR                QUESTIONS & ANSWERS EDITOR
	     Anne A. Salter                    Verna Urbanski
	     Atlanta Historical Society        Thomas G. Carpenter Library
	     3101 Andrews Dr.                  University of North Florida
	     Atlanta, GA  30305                P.O. Box 17605
					       Jacksonville, FL  32245-7605

Materials for publication in the OLAC Newsletter should be sent to the appropriate editor. Persons wishing to review books are invited to write to Anne Salter indicating their special areas of interest and qualifications. For AV cataloging questions, contact Verna Urbanski. Articles should be typed, double spaced, and consistent in length and style with other items published in the Newsletter. For membership renewal and change of address contact:

Catherine Leonardi
OLAC Treasurer
3604 Suffolk
Durham, NC 27707

Permission is granted to copy and disseminate information contained herein, provided the source is acknowledged.

Return to Table of Contents
Top


Last modified: December 1997
URL: http://ublib.buffalo.edu/libraries/units/cts/olac/newsletters/...
HTML version created by Brenda Battleson ( blb@acsu.buffalo.edu)
Return to OLAC Newsletter index