Return to Table of Contents

Bruce Johnson, RTSD AV Committee representative to CC:DA, talked about the AV-related documents he had sent to Lois McCune (chair of the Subcommittee), who had then sent them out to the subcommittee members for their input to Bruce. 3JSC/Chair 9 dealt with producers of nonbook materials. There was interest in extending the rules in Chapter 7 to include Chapters 8, 10, and possibly 9. 3JSC/Chair 10 proposed deleting the SMD "videorecording." 3JSC/Aus/1 argued that rule 7.7B10F was inadequate for giving technical information such as VHS or U-matic on videorecordings. Some people felt that it should go in the 300 field, but most fell that it should go in the first note. Some suggested that it be tagged a 538, although this is not currently acceptable for videorecordings. 3JSC Chair 14 dealt with the definition of kits. There was some objection to the fact that the American rules have added a sentence so that kit can now include single medium items. 3JSC/LABL/1 dealt with the revision process of AACR2. Bruce's reply to Verna Urbanski, chair of CC:DA, was sent out to subcommittee members by Lois McCune. Finally, CC:DA Marbi 3 was discussed. It dealt with handling multiple version linkage needs. The meeting in which this was to be presented took place on Monday, a day after our subcommittee meeting, so Bruce invited those who had an interest in the issue to attend that meeting.

Sheila Smyth reported on OLAC's activities. OLAC is still working on a manual for unpublished materials. They are still looking for examples of unpublished materials that need cataloging. If we have any, we should send them on to Sheila or Verna Urbanski. Examples of graphic materials are especially needed. Sheila said that OLAC had a very successful conference on decision making in November in Los Angeles. Karen Driessen and Sheila are working on a manual of physical processing of AV materials. If we have any manuals we have developed in-house, they would like to see them. They are exploring ways this manual might be published. They also discussed looking at labeling and packaging of CDs and at presenting some column in the OLAC Newsletter and seeing what the response is. There will be another OLAC convention in 1990 in Rochester, N.Y.

Next a mission statement for the subcommittee was discussed. This is a new subcommittee, and when it was set up, only a vague statement was presented. It included the responsibility for the promotion of AV cataloging, cooperation, and networking activities within the library community. When the Interdivisional Committee on AV CIP was dissolved, its responsibilities were subsumed by the RTSD AV Committee. Dick Thaxter suggested that when we take on a name like RTSD AV Cataloging Subcommittee, it should be more than just promotion and networking; we should get involved in substantive issues. Other suggestions relating to mission concerned being sources of expertise in ALA decision making, the subcommittee's relation with OLAC, and changing "promotion" to "promotion of standardization." Sheila suggested having something written up before the next meeting so we would have something to think about and a place to begin.

We looked at topics that were suggested to Lois in correspondence with subcommittee members before the meeting. Mary Mundy had several suggestions: multiple versions of AV materials, minimal level cataloging for AV materials; more involvement with the archival community, integrated catalogs and how or if this affects access to AV materials; and LCSH subject headings for AV materials. Patricia Vanderberg suggested promotion of AV cataloging; cooperation and networking; extension of NCCP for AV; and re-examination of the MARC formats for AV materials.

The topic "multiple versions" generated an interesting discussion. Some libraries are in favor of a master version record, and some for separate records for each manifestation. Dick Thaxter stressed that the multiple version effort is aimed at communication of records for multiple versions addressed in terms of a national network environment. In a union catalog situation or master record concept like OCLC the only way to unambiguously communicate who has what versions is separate records. That doesn't mean that in a local system you need to have separate records, but if you want to send them to another institution that is going to have records coming in from everyone, you need to say which ones you have by separate records. A lot of people think the holdings format could solve some of these problems. Linking fields in multiple records could be a big headache and would probably not be the best way to solve the problem of multiple hits and cluttered displays.

We next discussed minimal level cataloging for AV materials. Some committee members said their libraries were doing MLC for some kinds of AV materials. LC distributes books, serials, music, map, and AV MLC records. Dick said that he would like to expand the topic to include simplification of full level cataloging since LC's concept of MLC doesn't include things libraries consider important, such as Dewey and LC classification numbers and summaries. Dick asked if we really needed all the notes, the added entries for corporate bodies, and the distributors and publishers. LC is very much interested in simplification right now.

Since it was impossible to discuss any more topics in our one hour time slot, it was decided that we would send out a survey of members to see which topics were first, second, and third choices with members so that we would have a consensus on what to work on at our next meeting.

Mary Mundy volunteered to draft a position statement on the 538 field from the committee. She would then send it to Lois McCune, who would send it on to the committee for discussion.

Return to Table of Contents

Abington, PA -- Library Technologies, Inc. is a new company specializing in MARC database preparation services and microcomputer library software.

Library database preparation services include: duplicate record detection, database cleanup services, edit lists and printouts, database statistical analysis, item record creation, barcode label production, name and subject authority control, media transfer (tape to disk/disk to tape), MARC to ASCII and ASCII to MARC data conversions, and custom database programming. Bibliographic processing is available for both OCLC and RLIN libraries.

In addition to the above services, LTI has acquired ownership rights from Small Library Computing, Inc. to the Bib-base library software series. Bib-base is a microcomputer-based database management and information retrieval system with three current modules: acquisitions, cataloging and subject search. Modules for OPAC, circulation and serials control are under development.

Library Technologies Inc. is owned and operated by Robert J. Kepple and James G. Schoenung. A free brochure describing library database preparation decision points is available from LTI. To receive this brochure, or for information about Bib-base and other company services and products, call or write:

Cincinnati, Ohio -- Collection Analysis CD, a new compact disc-based collection analysis tool developed by OCLC, allows OCLC-member academic libraries to compare their collection development activity against representative holdings of pre-determined peer institutions, based on bibliographic and holdings data derived from the OCLC data base. In addition to the standard peer groups provided by the system, subscribers may define a peer group of their choice.

An interactive microcomputer format enables subscribers to conduct hands-on analyses at the local level. The analyses generate statistical data that describe user and peer group holdings within subject categories based on LC classification and the National Shelflist count. Additional information may be obtained from: AMIGOS Bibliographic Council, Inc., 11300 North Central Expressway, Suite 321, Dallas, TX 75243 (800-843-8482)

Return to Table of Contents

Words on Tape: an International Guide to the Audio Cassette Market, 1989. 4th ed. Edited by Ardis Voegelin-Carleton. Westport, Conn.: Meckler Corp., c1989. ISBN 0-88736-276-1. 582 p. $34.95

Words on Tape, a guide to commercially available, spoken-word audiocassettes, lists over 20,000 titles for rent or purchase from United States, Canadian and United Kingdom publishers. This 4th edition--as stated in the introduction--takes its information from questionnaires sent to publishers. The type, though necessarily small in this 582-page book, is easy to read, with titles in boldface and a space between each listing.

The bulk of the volume is a title index. The citations present the information clearly, completely and consistently. Each entry contains: title, author, name(s) of reader(s), contents and/or notes, as applicable, number of cassettes (usually in parentheses), playing time, purchase price, rental price (as applicable), order number, and the publisher's name in full.

Cross-indexing allows access to those elusive titles sometimes deeply buried in a collection. The editor calls this a "unique feature." If not unique, it is certainly useful. A similar tool, titled On Cassette: A comprehensive Bibliography of spoken Word Audio Cassettes (New York: Bowker, 1985) also has this singular characteristic. In addition, On Cassette, features a summary with almost every citation. In the Meckler publication, Words on Tape, the notes field seems to be present in only about 25% of the citations and ranges from short descriptive comments, such as "Includes printed material" to two- or three-line summaries.

Two other features found exclusively in On Cassette are: a reader/performer index and a producer/distributor/title index. These are nice to have, but I still find myself thumbing primarily through the title index.

Words on Tape indexes more titles -- 20,000, as compared to On Cassette's 11,500 -- and draws from the inventories of about 800 publishers.

Most patrons who request AV materials for rent or purchase do so by title. For the few who do not, the guide provides author and subject indexes as well.

The subject index is loosely based on the Library of Congress Subject Headings, 9th ed. A list of subject categories precedes the index. The index is easy to read because the subject headings are in boldface capital letters, and the titles indexed are indented under the subject heading.

Academic, school and public libraries should find the broad scope of this publication useful. Novels, poetry readings, children's fiction, plays, short stories, self-help, and radio plays are included, as well as biography, history, business, education and language instruction.

The two criticisms I have are points of annoyance rather than quarrels with basic content. First, there are eight pages of advertisements separating the publisher list and the beginning of the title index. Second, in the presentation of the citations, I find the last name, first name order entry of authors and readers is bothersome and awkward. I stumbled over the names in every entry. For example:

Facts, Foibles and Fancies. Morgan, Frank. Read by Morgan, Frank.

I think it would read better if names were not inverted.

Words on Tape offers a list of publishers and distributors with full addresses and telephone numbers. In this age of "here today, out of print tomorrow," the written word is sometimes not fast enough. Hunting down telephone numbers when you need to order NOW is time consuming and frustrating, so this essential part of publisher information is much appreciated.

Anyone who has ever pawed through countless publisher's catalogs to find that one half-remembered title will welcome this index. In fact, having purchase and rental prices, together with the order number, is invaluable. This well-rounded and thorough listing is a must for any institution that buys or rents audiocassettes.

As explained in the introduction, this represents a cumulation from two sources: (1) the lists of significant changes issued with the Library of Congress subject headings from 1974 to 1985, and (2) the successor to these lists, the lists of revised subject headings published in each issue of the Cataloging Service Bulletin beginning with no. 32 (Spring 1986).

The subject headings are cumulated in one alphabetical list by the superseded subject heading; changed subdivisions are cumulated alphabetically by superseded subdivision in a separate listing.

Since a cross-reference was not routinely made from the old to the new form of subject heading by the Library of Congress until 1986, this listing will be helpful to libraries that did not maintain subject corrections from the original lists as they were issued and now wish to convert subject headings retrospectively. The list could be used (1) in a manual conversion project, (2) to identify headings for on-line correction, or (3) as a supplement to an automatic conversion project, to identify headings that would not be found as cross-references in an on-line authority and automatically converted. Its usefulness for retrospective conversion will vary indirectly with the amount of prior maintenance a library has done with its subject headings, and with the extent and nature of automatic conversion services available to the library.

For libraries that are not able to correct older headings, the list might be offered as a reference aid to help reference librarians and the public connect older and newer subject materials. The list could also be helpful to catalog departments which receive older imprints and need to update subject headings on LC cataloging.

A word of caution -- headings changed prior to 1974 and headings changed from 1974 to 1986 but not put on the significant lists will obviously not be covered. Changes made from 1986 forward should be adequately covered by the LCSH authority structure. In Cataloging Service Bulletin no. 15 (Winter 1982), the Library of Congress issued a list of subject headings changed from 1975-1980 without cross-references from the old to the new form. This list contains some material not in the book under review, and could be a useful supplement to it.

Nancy Olson continues her tradition of providing much needed information in a sensible and accessible format in this long-awaited Glossary. It is a clean-looking publication -- visually pleasing, crisp and uncluttered. The glossary provides definitions for materials covered in chapters 3, 5-11 of AACR2.

Olson has pulled together information from a variety of sources to provide most of the definitions a nonprint cataloger would need in an average day, A two-page list of "attributed definitions" provides a source key for some of the definitions, but many of the most useful definitions are "unattributed," i.e. created by Olson. A three-page bibliography provides full citations for persons wishing further information.

The really fine illustrations accompanying the text are a special feature of the publication. They have been provided by Francoise Lamy-Rousseau and OCLC, the Glossary's publisher. The use of "see" and "see also" references is generous and practical. One particularly useful feature is the provision of variant meanings. For example, "backup copy" is defined as both a duplicate copy of the contents of a computer file and as a copy of a video or sound recording often circulated in place of the original.

Terms that catalogers bandy about with only indefinite ideas about their true meaning are presented with clarity. Numerous definitions are provided for cartographic terms and phrases, most of which left my head spinning, since I have never cataloged maps. The definitions may be for terms common to map cataloging, but may seem exotic and technical to the uninitiated or the novice cataloger. What is a "remote sensing device," anyway???

Olson's Glossary is a fine addition to the special materials reference tools she has already authored. The Glossary is available from OCLC and is a handy addition to the cataloging or general audiovisual reference shelf.

Music Subject Headings was compiled from Library of Congress Subject Headings and provides music catalogers with a one-volume desk reference set that can be used on a daily basis in assigning subject headings to scores, sound recordings, and books about music.

The introduction contains all LC policy statements from the Subject Cataloging Manual: Subject Headings that apply to music headings, as well as simple instructions for the formulation of headings for musical works.

The section entitled "Significant Changes and Revisions" should be of use to those planning and implementing retrospective conversion projects that include music records, the subject headings are complete through September, 1987.

Submitted by
Bobbie DeCoster

Return to Table of Contents

A VTLS A/V Interest Group is being formed to express the concerns of AV catalogers and users to VTLS, Inc. AV formats tend to present special problems and concerns in online systems, and the VTLS system is no exception. One concern, for example, is the VTLS treatment of the GMD in both the 245 and 740, fields. The GMD is not bracketed, but appears at the end of the line, along with the prescribed punctuation (/) preceding the first statement of responsibility. This also causes the first statement of responsibility to run into the title, resulting in a confusing display. An example follows:

The Interest Group would like to compile these and other problems in a newsletter. VTLS users with an interest in AV who wish further information, or to join the group, should contact:

Sharon G. Almquist,
Media Library,
P.O. Box 12898
University of North Texas
Denton, TX 76203-2898
(817) 565-2186

As of January, 1989, the Library of Congress has discounted pre-assigning catalog card numbers to sound recordings. This program has been terminated primarily because participation has declined precipitously as recording companies have adopted the compact disc format. Of course, the Library of Congress will continue to catalog sound recordings and make the cataloging data available through the Music MARC Distribution Service and Music, Books on Music, and sound Recordings.

Return to Table of Contents

A symposium, "Music Librarianship in America," will be held at Harvard University, October 5-7, 1989. The Symposium aims at stimulating music librarians to reflect on the larger aspects of their calling, in part by looking at their profession through the eyes of those in neighboring disciplines.

Distinguished representatives from the fields of musicology, ethnomusicology, history, publishing, arts administration, performance, criticism, librarianship, and library education will explore the roles of music librarians as custodians of cultural history, their relationships with scholarship, performance, and composition, and their role in the world of American music.

In addition to the program featuring distinguished participants, there will also be three concerts: an evening of Black gospel music, a performance by the Boston Camerata, and an organ recital by Ewald Kooiman.

For additional information, contact:

Return to Table of Contents

The 1988 revision of AACR2 produced few substantive changes to the existing rules beyond what was already available through rule interpretations and revisions. However, an important exception should be noted, especially for catalogers of certain types of sound recordings (Chapter 6), motion pictures and videorecordings (Chapter 7), certain types of graphic materials (Chapter 8), and computer files (Chapter 9). Some trade names and comparable technical designations formerly transcribed in the physical description area are now to be recorded in the notes area instead.

For sound track film, 6.5C2 no longer allows the name of the unique recording system (e.g. Phillips-Hiller) to be recorded in the physical description area (300 field of a MARC record). When this information is needed, it is placed in a general note (6.7B10).

For motion pictures and videorecordings, 7.5B1 now stipulates that trade names and other specifications be mentioned in a note (7.7B10) rather than in the physical description area. Most commonly, this means that video format designations (VHS, Beta, LaserVision) will always be placed in a note. Previously, this had been the case only when the item was available in more than one format. Special projection requirements for film (e.g. Panavision, Cinerama) continue to be recorded in the physical description area (7.5C2).

For stereographs, the trade name or technical specification (e.g. Viewmaster) is now recorded in a note (8.7B10), rather than in the physical description area (8.5B).

For computer files, the trade name or make and model of the computer(s) able to run the file(s) is now always recorded in a systems requirement note (9.7B1b), which is field 538 in MARC format. The means that computer makes and models (e.g. Apple II, IBM PC) will never appear in the physical description field (9.5B1). In the past, this information appeared in the physical description field (field 300 of MARC format) when the computer file was designed to run on only one type of machine.

OCLC users should begin applying these guidelines immediately.

Submitted by
Jay Weitz
Quality Control Librarian
OCLC, Inc.

QUESTION FOLLOW-UP: A cataloger at the Motion Picture, Broadcasting and Recorded Sound Division at LC wrote to comment that some of the records having the 508 credits note before the 511 cast note (see OLAC Newsletter v.8, no.3, p.31) may have their origins in M/B/RS. One of M/B/RS's primary tools is the W. White-Hensen manual Archival Moving Image Materials (AMIM). "Traditionally film archives have considered credits to be more significant than cast, and this concept is reflected in AMIM," says the correspondent. Additionally, internal policy manuals used by M/B/RS place the credits before the cast note. This may explain some occurrences of the reversal of the order of the two notes. Catalogers outside M/B/RS and the archival community should continue to use the order indicated by 7.7B6. Thanks for writing with this added information. -- VU

QUESTION: I am writing to voice concern regarding implications of the decision to move technical specifications such as VHS out of the 300 field. In many automated systems, brief displays do not show notes. In some systems, notes don't show in any display. On the WLN system, if one is trying to have a bibliography made from WLN, the system display shows the 300 field, but no 500 notes. In the world of video, I think it is imperative to know whether a video is Beta or VHS, not just 1/2 inch.

ANSWER: Your points are well taken. AACR2 7.5B1 provided for trade names or other technical specifications to appear in either the physical description area or the notes area. This dual location caused problems. Moving trade names and technical specifications to the notes area makes treatment more uniform within chapter 7 and across the chapters. With AACR2 some agencies selected to always put this information in the physical description area, For them AACR2R 7.5B1 will be a change. There is general concern about the note being 7.7B10 which could place the information down quite far in the catalog record. CC:DA has asked the Joint Steering Committee to consider following the pattern set at 9.7B1 to move the technical specifications to the top of the notes area. In the meantime, AACR2R 7.7B clearly says that notes can be reordered to fit local needs, so local agencies can use the first note position if desired.

Asking for the cataloging rules to change to fit the needs of specific automated systems is tricky, since there is no standard brief record display. Utilities could be encouraged to exploit the capability of the 007 field for printing bibliographies. The data should be there in coded form for any title which has been properly cataloged under the AV format using the 007, and has an accurately-created fixed field area. Customers for automated systems need to work with their vendors to get the results they want from their bibliographic records. The potential for manipulation is one of the selling points of automation, but it means that agencies must be willing to go through the hassle of making the vendor support needed functions.

I know there are good reasons for brief record display online catalogs, but why are we doing all this intricate cataloging if the user doesn't see it? Is it just for collection development personnel? --- VU

The following questions and answers are taken from the Q&A section of the OLAC conference held in Los Angeles in November of 1988. Panelist included: Ed Glazier (RLIN), Glenn Patton (OCLC), Ann Fox (LC), Sheila Intner (Simmons College) with Verna Urbanski moderating. Thanks are due to Bobby Ferguson of Louisiana State Library for her help in transcribing these notes.

QUESTION: What is the chief source of information for a compact disc? In the report of the program on AACR2R at New Orleans ALA (v.8, no.3, p.16), it indicates that you take the information from the container.

ANSWER:

Patton: Take it from the label on the CD unless the container provides a collective title and the label doesn't.
Intner: From the label on the CD. However, the label on a CD is smaller than the label on a vinyl record, so it maybe necessary to resort to the container to get the fuller information.

ANSWER:

Patton: Sound recordings are more likely to have multiple works by multiple composers. Rule 1.1G says what to do with multiple titles proper and multiple statements of responsibility. The GMD goes at the end. This conflicts somewhat with the concept of the GMD as an "early warning" device. The ISBDs are changing this so the GMD always comes after the first title.
Fox: LC runs into the same problem in video cataloging when several titles or parts are involved, and the GMD is considerably further down.
Intner: For user friendly cataloging, you should trace other titles as added entries and put the GMD at the end of each title.
Urbanski: LC no longer uses GMDs in added entries.

ANSWER:

Urbanski: I have talked with Dick Thaxter at LC about this. LC is trying to find a way to establish a consistent pattern for handling these series. In general, Dick advises us to use the individual part title when it is distinctive. Archival collections which deal with titles which are often generic use the title of the series followed by the part title.
Fox: If the individual part title is distinctive, use it. If you have all the segments of the series and some of the titles are not distinctive, use the title of the series followed by the part title, and make an added entry for the part title.

ANSWER:

Urbanski: AACR2R rules say to always put it in a note. It is no longer included in the 300 field even if there is only one version. [See also the first q&a above -- VU]

ANSWER:

Urbanski: I don't think there would be much support for that in the Joint Steering Committee. There is reluctance to change the cataloging code to accommodate variant online systems.
Patton: The ISBD for nonprint specifies putting this information in the 300 field. In computer software, you can put technical specifications in a specific tag so it can be written into the online display. Perhaps in format integration the 538 field could include video format as well as computer software.

ANSWER: Urbanski and Patton: Input a new record.

QUESTION: Would you treat this as a "Bound with" title as in a monograph? In other words, would you create a complete description for each item and link the two descriptions using "with" notes?

ANSWER:

Patton: You could. I would recommend using both titles in the 245 field since there is no unique collective title. The title proper of the two programs is the collective title.
Intner: Subsequent descriptive elements must match the titles given then. For example, you must use two playing times in the physical description.

ANSWER:

Patton: Use the title as projected. If it is the foreign title, that is what you should use. If it is in both languages, do a parallel title.
Urbanski: Give the title on the container (the English title in this case) in a note, and then trace the title.

ANSWER:

Intner: It depends on whether the video emanated from the museum.
Glazier: If the museum arranged for it to be shot, the museum would be the main entry in the 110 field. If someone else arranged for it to be shot, the museum would be in the 710 field.
Intner: The AACR2 words are: "Consider a work to have emanated from a corporate body if it is issued by that body or has been caused to be issued by that body or if it originated with that body."
Urbanski: If in doubt, enter it by title.

ANSWER:

Urbanski: Treat the university as the producer of the title. Then, based on what the item looks like, either ignore the video company (i.e., treat it as merely the physical producer of the item) or as the distributor if they appear to be fulfilling that function.
Fox: How prominent is the name and how permanent is the container? You can always make an access point for the video company if you think there is reason to want that access.
Intner: Put the video company in the 260 if it appears to be the distributor. You'd never treat a video producer as the organization from which this emanated, that is, as the main entry.

ANSWER:

Urbanski: We don't generally use a 130 if it is virtually the same as the 245 form of the title. The object of the uniform title in the Gandhi example is to sort out the motion picture itself from books about the making of the movie Gandhi.
Fox: LC creates a 130 in such cases when a 730 is needed, and the title is the same as the title of another work or the same as an LC subject heading.
Intner: Remember that the 130 and 730 function completely differently. The 130 is for the item itself. The 730 is used on the cataloging for a related item.

ANSWER:

Urbanski: Usually these would be unpublished items.
Glazier: Use the subject of the tape as the main entry.

ANSWER:

Fox: At LC, when a single update comes in for a monographic item, we make a note of it in the catalog record if it is issued as such (e.g., to replace the original software). LC has not been getting serial updates because we are just beginning to acquire these packages. The disk is only one piece of the item. Any program disk being replaced should have addenda for the documentation.
Glazier: It depends on how you record holdings. If the set consists of six disks and two come first to be followed by others, it would be equivalent to multiple volume monographs with a variation in the editions of various volumes.
Intner: In paper form, LC treats this as a monograph with open volumes in the physical description. This seems like a good strategy for this updated software, too.
Fox: The only problem with the loose-leaf approach is that you are cataloging it from its start as a loose-leaf. You don't always have that luxury with computer software. You cannot anticipate that further updates will occur.
Urbanski: When you talk about updating holdings, are you retaining both the old version and the new? Or, substituting one in place of the other?
Intner: Somewhere you'd have to keep track of that for circulation purposes, too.
Patton: On the other side, what you bought was version 3 in a binder, but that software has now become version 4, and soon it may become version 5, Subsequent purchasers will get different versions at different times. Everyone in the future will be coming into the flow of updates at different times. So it may be necessary to have separate records for each version of the title. Depending on the item, it may be appropriate to have a single record for the whole title and a serial record for updates.
Intner: Remember that loose-leafs do not have edition statements. Our combined wisdom may say "There is no easy way to handle this!"

ANSWER:

Intner: If it is not given on the piece, or the accompanying information, don't supply it. Never put an audience note if not on the piece. If MPAA ratings are present, put that in the note: MPAA rating: R18.
Urbanski: EL-HI indicates the levels for curriculum materials. When it is not on the item, but I want to incorporate the information, I sometimes include it in the summary note. The publisher's information also sometimes gives the level.

Return to Table of Contents

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

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

        
		 Person     Institution     Person     Institution     Person     Institution  
 
US               $7.00        $13.00        $13.00       $25.00        $18.00       $36.00
			 
Non-US           $9.00        $15.00        $17.00       $29.00        $24.00       $42.00

Please circle the amount above that you are enclosing: fill out the application below; make checks (in US funds only) payable to: ONLINE AUDIOVISUAL CATALOGERS and mail to:

NAME:

JOB TITLE:

INSTITUTION:

INSTITUTION ADDRESS:

HOME ADDRESS:
(optional)

Circle preferred address: HOME // INSTITUTION

AREAS OF INTEREST: (check all that apply)

UTILITY USED (circle): OCLC // RLIN // WLN // UTLAS // OTHER

LOCAL SYSTEM (specify):

ARE YOU INTERESTED IN SERVING ON AN OLAC COMMITTEE? _____Yes _____No
ARE YOU INTERESTED IN PLANNING AN OLAC CONFERENCE? ______Yes _____No

CHECK HERE IF YOU DO NOT WANT YOUR NAME:

Return to Table of Contents

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.)

 
	  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:

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