OLAC RESEARCH GRANT APPLICATION FORM
(Please type or print clearly)
Principal investigator:
Mailing address:
E-mail address:
Daytime telephone:
Place of employment:
Position title:
Project title:
Brief description of proposed project:
Member of Online Audiovisual Catalogers since:
Co-investigator(s):
Proposal must follow OLAC's Guidelines for Proposals and include this completed application form.
Proposals must be received by the OLAC President by MARCH 1, 2001.
Send the application form and proposal to:
Lowell Ashley
Cataloging Services
Smithsonian Institution Libraries
National Museum of Natural History
Room 30
Washington, D.C. 20560-0154
E-mail: ashleyl@sil.si.edu
Return to Table of Contents
CONFERENCE REPORTS
Mary Konkel, University of Akron
Column Editor
** REPORTS FROM THE **
2000 ALA ANNUAL CONFERENCE
Chicago, Illinois
MACHINE-READABLE BIBLIOGRAPHIC INFORMATION COMMITTEE
(MARBI)
Liaison Report
Submitted by John Attig
Pennsylvania State University
The Machine-Readable Bibliographic Information (MARBI) Committee and the USMARC Advisory Group met for two sessions during the ALA Annual Conference in Chicago, IL. The following items will be of interest to OLAC members:
- Proposal No. 2000-07: Definition of Subfield $y (Link text) in Field 856
This proposal attempts to provide explicit coding in field 856 for text that will be displayed in online catalogs in connection with the 856 field and will be the clickable link to the resource. Although typically the URL (subfield $u) is intended to be d
isplayed, there are cases in which this might not be desirable. Subfield $y, when present, would be displayed instead. The proposal was approved.
- Discussion Paper No. 119: Seriality and MARC 21
This discussion paper is, in part, a progress report on the revision of the AACR2 rules for continuing resources. The basic concepts of continuing resources and integrating resources have been accepted, and the specific rule revisions will be considered i
n September. Continuing resources are those which are issued over time, usually with no predetermined conclusion. Serials are one type of continuing resource, those which are issued in a succession of discrete parts. The other type of continuing resources
are integrating resources, those in which updates are merged or integrated into the resource and do not remain distinct. Examples of integrating resources are loose-leaf services, online databases, and many Web sites.
The rule revision proposals will impact MARC 21 in various areas:
- Bibliographic Level (Leader/07): The discussion paper proposed to retain the present definition of code "s" (Serials) and to add a new code "i" (Integrating resources).
- 008/18 (Frequency): The discussion paper suggested adding a new code "k" (Continuously updated) which would be applicable to many integrating resources.
- 008/21 (Type of serial): The discussion paper suggested (a) changing the name of the element to "Type of continuing resource" and adding a code "I" (loose-leaf).
- 008/34 (Successive/latest entry indicator): The paper recommends adding a new code for "integrating entry" rather than treating the cataloging of integrating resources as "latest entry" cataloging.
- 260 (Publication, distribution, etc.): The discussion paper proposes to use field 260 for all publication information and proposes indicator values to distinguish the earliest publication information, the latest publication information, and any interv
ening information. The rules for serials will continue to call for the earliest information to appear in the publication area and later changes to appear in notes. The new rules for integrating resources will call for the latest publication information to
appear in the publication area and all earlier information in notes. The proposed coding conventions for 260 will allow consistent recording of the data and can be manipulated to provide the appropriate displays. This part of the paper caused the most di
scussion and comment.
In other action, MARBI approved a proposal dealing with numbering schemes in the Holdings format; rejected a proposal to add subfields to field 754 (Taxonomic Identification); and approved changes to field 052 (Geographic
Classification Code) and the deletion of field 058 (Other Geographic Classification
Codes) in the Community Information Format.
Return to Table of Contents
ALCTS COMMITTEE ON CATALOGING:
DESCRIPTION AND ACCESS (CC:DA)
Liaison Report
Submitted by Vicki Toy-Smith
University of Nevada, Reno
Saturday, July 8, 2000
Daniel Kinney, Chair, called the meeting to order and delivered several opening remarks.
There is the possibility of holding a pre-conference on map cataloging in 2001. It may be postponed until 2002 since the 2nd edition of the Map Cataloging Manual will be published after the 2001 ALA Annual Conference. Mary Larsgaard will be looking
into the planning of the pre-conference.
Jean Hirons presented the report on "Revising AACR2 to Accommodate Seriality" There was positive reaction to the report given at the NASIG Conference; however, there were concerns about smaller issues.
Concerns included:
- harmonization;
- terms being added or dropped from various lists. This is important regarding title changes;
- international serials title will replace the key title;
- source of title proper (12.7B3);
- title changes (21.2A1);
- basis of description;
- expansion of the scope of Chapter 12;
- multiparts.
A task force will be formed to study the inconsistencies between chapters 9 and 12. CC:DA will try to reconstitute the old Task Force on Serials as closely as possible.
Brian Schottlaender delivered the report from the most recentJoint Steering Committee meeting.
Items covered included:
25.35. "work" in music uniform titles (25.35, etc.);
9.4B2. all remote electronic resources be published;
9.5B1. There is opposition to this revision. There is a suggestion to change DVD to DVD-ROM;
9.5D2. CCC proposed revision in 4JSC/ALA/27 ALA follow-up/CCC
response accepted (issues regarding remote access resources tabled);
9.7B8. LC proposed revision deferred pending review;
9.7B22. "container": LC proposed revised definition accepted;
"direct access " (Electronic resources): LC proposed revised definition not accepted. ALA proposed definition in 4J5C/ALA27/ALA follow-up/4 accepted with order of "disks/discs" reversed, "computer" changed to "computeriz
ed device," and "by the user" deleted;
"disk"/"optical disc": deferred pending review by all constituents;
22.1C. title of nobility or terms of honor; this needs to further revised;
22.12. There were concerns that there have been too many additions to this rule;
22.16. Additions to names entered under given name, etc. Reaction to ... BL/4 was mixed. There is need for revision;
22.19B1. There needs to be distinction between honors and titles. Honors are okay; however, titles are not since they are temporary;
26.2A. Names of persons. See references. The British Library has
proposed additional revisions to those proposed in .../BL/5.
There needs to be further discussion/response regarding 26.2A;
1.4C3. Place of publication, distribution, etc. Not supported by the JSC;
withdrawn by CCC;
1.4D2. There is a need to revise this proposal.
0.24. Recommendation 1 (the need to revise 0.24) was approved. The proposed revision states: "It is important to bring out all aspects of the item being described, including its content, its carrier, its type of publication, its bibliographic relatio
nships, and whether it is published or unpublished. In any given area of the
description, all relevant aspects should be described. As a rule of thumb, the cataloger should follow the more specific rules
applying to the item being cataloged, whenever they differ from the general rule."
Recommendation 2 (Option C) was rejected.
Barbara Tillett presented the Library of Congress report.
LC completed the implementation of the Integrated Library System (LC ILS) on October 1, 1999. In May 2000, LC installed the MARC record "Validator" software for all staff working in the LCL ILS cataloging module. The software checks for data err
ors and inconsistencies in bibliographic records before they are added to the database. The software was developed by David Williamson and Gary Strawn. LC is working with Endeavor Information Systems in order to implement Voyager Release 2000 near the end
of this year.
Modifications include:
- geospatial search capability;
- added tracking for added entry information;
- capability of deleting online records;
- catalogers will be able to see CJK characters soon;
- multi-surname indicator is now obsolete;
- full MARC 21 authority records will be available in the full MARC 21 format.
Monday, July 10, 2000
Report from the Metadata Pre-Conference was presented by Mary Larsgaard. There were 361 people registered; however, there were 420 attendees plus 29 faculty members. The attendees were generally positive about the preconference. The papers of the pre-conf
erence will be published in Spring 2001.
Adam Schiff reported on the rule revision proposals for electronic resources.
1.4F7. Changes in relation to Chapter 12 (resource is not yet complete.
One recommendation: earlier dates will be added with square brackets (e.g. [1997]).
1 .4F8. There still remains the issue regarding the GMD. There is some concern about the definition of multipart items and continuing resources.
1 .7B 16. Concerns details in other formats. If something is issued as an electronic resource, will this be entered under a one record approach or something else.
2.7B1 1 Accompanying material. This concerns the PDF format and system requirements.
Adam moved to accept the proposal to change 2.7B1 1.
2.7B 16. Addresses: "issued also as": e.g. computer file, electronic form (direct access vs. remote access), and CD-ROM. It has been suggested that there be 2 examples not 3 (delete the 3rd example).
Laurel Jizba gave the report from the Task Force on the ISBD(M). The task force members came to agreement on 9 elements:
- optional elements;
- parallel titles;
- statement of responsibility;
- statement of responsibility following the edition statement;
- parallel titles in series;
- parallel titles in subseries;
- note on nature and scope;
- note on literary form;
- terms of availability
It was noted that LC has proposed to eliminate Area 3 from Chapter 9 and move various portions to other areas of the rules. The Task Force thought that a variety of ideas have been presented as alternatives to rule 9.3 and suggested three options:
- Retain rule 9.3 as revised byJSC;
- Retain rule 9.3 but add the designation as an optional area;
- Eliminate rule 9.3 and add language to other related rules.
There was no consensus about a favorite option.
John Hostage presented the report on the rule revision proposal on use of full stops with metric unit symbols. Periods after symbols should be eliminated. There needs to be ISO compliance for symbols.
The report on the Task Force on VP.A Core Categories was given. The core categories have similarities to AACR2.
Mark Watson delivered the report on MARBI activities. There were discussions regarding DP 119 and DP 114 (concerning the repeatability of the 260 field). There are issues relating to leader/07 (Bibliographic level) and 008/21 (Type of serial), field 260 (
Publication, distribution, etc.), and field 008/23 (Successive/latest entry indicator). Proposal No. 2000-09 (Changes to field 052 and 058) was approved. There will be an alignment between the community format and bibliographic format.
Proposal No. 2000-07 Definition of subfield $y (Link text) in field 856 will be added in all formats. It is proposed that there will be the addition of the "y" subfield; this will be helpful for display purposes.
Report from the Task Force on an Appendix of Major and Minor Changes was delivered by Kristen Lindlan. One of the problems encountered by the Task Force was the General Material Designation section: (E.3A2). The definitions for "finite resource"
and "integrating resource" are confusing. Some integrating resources are not finite. Appendix E concerns Description (E.3A) which states:
"Finite resource" - Generally, consider any change in title proper a MAJOR change. Exceptionally, consider as MINOR changes variations in title proper that represent only production errors at the item level, e.g., the omission of letters from a
title due to typesetting errors in a printing which are correct in other printings constitutes a MINOR change.
"Integrating resource" - Consider any change in title proper a MINOR change. Replace the title proper with the new title and give the earlier title in a note an added entry if considered to be important.
Thus, there is confusion as to when to make a new record. The group addressed guidance issues: 1) stop the proliferation of records for no good reason 2) multiple versions issues 3) reproductions. However, the Task Force does not want to make changes unti
l after CC:DA has reviewed this document. Regarding integrating resources, one cannot take things individually; one must take into consideration all of the aspects. A substantive change in content requires that a cataloger make a new record.
Betsy Mangan delivered the report from the Committee on Rule Change Proposals for Cartographic Materials. There are changes to 3.3C2. The Committee decided to withdraw rule 3.3D2.
3.7B8 Scales vary will be changed to scales differ.
3.7B 10. Concerns notes in other parts of the physical description.
3.7B 12. The term map is used for the item that a person is cataloging; this is not a series designation. The committee was also concerned about glossary and cartographic terms.
Mary Larsgaard gave the report from the Task Force on Metadata. There was no consensus on the definition of metadata. Metadata is not really considered to be a seamless approach to cataloging. Larsgaard talked about the California Digital Library, the pos
sibility of having an overarching search engine, and Pharoes.
Glenn Patton stated that OCLC's CORC service is now in production.
The records in CORC will be integrated into World Cat. The Dublin Core to
MARC cross-walk is complete so that such CORC Records are available in World
Cat. Such records are coded according to MARC 21 standards. The user can
check the 042 field and the encoding level in CORC records.
The report on Descriptive Cataloging of Ancient, Medieval, Renaissance, and Early-Modern Manuscripts (AMREMM) was presented. The committee has recommended that there is a need for manuscripts that are not printed books. They have drafted version 11 and ar
e asking CC:DA for comments. A task force was formed to look at this report.
The final report on CC:AAM Non-Roman Access Points Subcommittee report was delivered. James Agenbroad's report does not address non-Roman headings completely enough.
It included these points:
- there is a need to monitor the MARBI Multilingual Task Force; issues regarding MARC 21 are of concern;
- there is work in progress regarding this topic among other committees other committees (e.g. IFLA);
- there needs to be an examination of all aspects of non-Roman access points;
- the subcommittee thanked Agenbroad for his suggestions.
Return to Table of Contents
ASSOCIATION OF MOVING IMAGE ARCHIVISTS (AMIA)
CATALOGING AND DOCUMENTATION REPORT
Liaison Report
Submitted by Amy Wood
Chicago Historical Society
AMIA members are interested in creating a national moving image cataloging center and website gateway The National Cataloging Project Subcommittee was formed in the Fall of 1999 to hire a consultant to prepare a comprehensive report detailing the feasibil
ity of creating this online resource. This Spring, the Subcommittee received $25,0000 from the National Film Preservation Board to support their work and have hired a consultant.
AMIA will be publishing the Compendium of Archival Moving Image Cataloging Practice. The Compendium will present the various cataloging practices of twenty-seven participating institutions. The goal of creating and providing this publication was to offer
solutions to cataloging problems and generate discussion of moving image cataloging issues. The Cataloging Compendium will be published soon in hard copy and selected portions will be made available on the AMIA website at http://www.amianet.org/, to give potential readers a taste of the full print version. The print publication will be available at a fairly low cost through major online distributors such as Amazon.com.
Return to Table of Contents
UPDATE FROM OCLC
Submitted by Glenn Patton, OCLC
DATABASE: As of July 1, 2000, there were about 1,288,000 Visual Materials, 1,446,000 sound recordings and 148,000 computer files records. There are now more than 767 million holdings attached to bibliographic records.
CATALOGING: Interest continues to be high in the OCLC CatExpress Service, a web-based, copy-cataloging interface that is targeted at small school and public libraries. Recent enhancements to CatExpress include support for NLM call numbers
and improved screen navigation. <http://www.oclc.org/oclc/cataloging/catexpress/>
OCLC has installed a number of changes to its implementation of the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format, including code list changes, changes to record displays, and the addition of two new encoding Level values, '3' (Abbreviated) and '4' (Core). Some additional
changes are yet to be scheduled. All changes are described in Technical Bulletin 236 <http://www.oclc.org/oclc/tb/tb236/>.
OCLC began the Arabic Cataloging pilot project on June 1. The pilot software support cataloging activity such as searching editing, updating holdings, and exporting MARC records and allows the creation of bibliographic records containing Arabic script. Th
e pilot is open to all existing OCLC Cataloging members. More information is available at <http://purl.oclc.org/oclc/arabic>.
The keyword searching changes that were planned for last year are now scheduled for the third quarter 2000. These changes, which include both changes to existing indexes as well as new indexes and qualifiers, are described in Technical Bulletin 235 <http://www.oclc.org/oclc/tb/tb235/tb235.htm>. The TB will be revised and redistributed prior to installation of these changes. Highlights of interest include separate personal, corporate
and conference name indexes; call number indexes; a new index for 856 fields; a new qualifier for internet resources; and the extension of the DLC qualifier to keyword searching.
OCLC staff are preparing for the Wade-Giles/Pinyin conversion effort that will happen this fall. OCLC will convert authority records for redistribution by the Library of Congress and will convert all records in WorldCat that contain WadeGiles text. Conver
sion options for member libraries' databases will also be provided.
CORC: The OCLC Cooperative Online Resource Catalog (CORCTM) service closes its Founders Phase on June 30, 2000. During the Founders Phase, a
pre-production version of CORC was used by nearly 500 libraries in two dozen
countries. The production CORC service launches July 1, 2000.
Description: CORC offers 4 databases: CORC Resource Catalog (RC), CORC Authority File, CORC Pathfinder Database, and (optional with paid subscription) WebDewey in CORC. Designed to support librarians in efficiently and cooperatively providing acces
s to electronic resources, CORC is a Web-based OCLC system which supports cataloging/metadata creation, linked authority control, and the rapid production of digital pathfinders (i.e. Web-accessible bibliographies). The CORC RC includes 300,000+ resource
records describing networked resources and is integrated with WorldCat (the OCLC Online Union Catalog). All WorldCat records with MARC 21 field 856 will routinely be loaded into the CORC RC, and records will be synchronized between the two databases. As p
art of CORC's change to a production service, OCLC NetFirst records will be loaded into WorldCat and subsequently into the CORC RC on a daily basis. RC resource records may be created and exported in the users' choice of OCLC MARC or Dublin Core format.
Further information: A more complete description of the new service is available at <http://purl.oclc.org/corc>. OCLC has recently issued OCLC Technical Bulletin 239 describing details of CORC's integra
tion with the OCLC Cataloging system. As part of the release of CORC, OCLC will issue guidelines for creating Dublin Core records in the CORC system.
Return to Table of Contents
NEWS & ANNOUNCEMENTS
Barbara Vaughan, Column Editor
GENERAL MATERIAL DESIGNATIONS (GMDS)
IN THE 21ST CENTURY
CALL FOR SURVEY RESPONDENTS
Online Audiovisual Catalogers (OLAC) has given Jean Weihs a grant to study appropriate general material designations (gmds) for the twenty-first century. To help with this study, Jean asks technical services staff, who catalog nonbook materials, and publi
c service staff, who use the catalog, to respond to the questionnaire at the web page:
http://www.modpublishing.com/Survey/GMDSurvey.htm
(Note: URL is case
sensitive).
This survey can be completed and sent to Jean using one of the following methods:
- Answer the questions on line and send the results using the Submit Survey button at the end of the survey,
OR
- Download and print the survey only; download and print survey and accompanying support information, fill the survey out by hand and fax it to Jean at: (416) 925-4704.
OR
- Mail the completed survey to:
GMDs Survey
Attention: Jean Weihs
6 Edgar Avenue
Toronto, Ontario
Canada M4W 2A9
Please read the Overview and Instructions section before beginning the survey
Return to Table of Contents
OCLC COOPERATIVE ONLINE RESOURCE CATALOG DEBUTS
DUBLIN, Ohio, July 6, 2000--The OCLC Cooperative Online Resource Catalog (CORC) is now available as a regular service. Built cooperatively with nearly 500 libraries over the past 18 months, CORC is a Web-based system for building bibliographic records and
pathfinders (subject bibliographies) for electronic resources.
CORC lets librarians work together to target the best Web resources available that fit local needs, leveraging a proven cooperative model to minimize duplication of effort and maximize knowledge sharing across libraries from around the world. CORC gives l
ibraries the ability to make local resources available to the world and to make quality global resources available to local library users.
By bringing together librarianship, technology and cooperation, CORC offers an unprecedented opportunity for librarians to apply their knowledge management expertise to the World Wide Web and guide users to valuable, authoritative Web resources.
"With its bridge between traditional and new forms of metadata, CORC is an important tool that libraries can use to facilitate access to the Web and to maximize the usefulness of their online catalogs," said Kathleen L. Wells, senior catalog lib
rarian, University of Southern Mississippi.
"CORC is one of the most exciting services that I have seen introduced during my 26 years at OCLC," said Gary R. Houk, vice president, OCLC Services. "In addition to helping libraries manage access to electronic resources, the CORC service
will play a major role in OCLC's future product strategy Future releases of the CORC service will support cataloging of all materials, vernacular languages, and a database architecture that will virtually extend WorldCat to additional resource description
s such as reviews, biographies and tables-of-contents. This extended WorldCat is a key element to an integrated suite of Web-based services that are planned, including selection and ordering of content from other third-party providers."
CORC offers a toolkit, based on technology developed at OCLC, that supports automated record creation, authority control, URL maintenance and pathfinder creation. Libraries using CORC have the option of subscribing to the WebDewey service for access to th
e latest version of the enhanced Dewey Decimal Classification database (updated quarterly) and use of an automatic classification tool to generate candidate DDC numbers during record creation. A special feature of the WebDewey service is its inclusion of
selected Library of Congress subject headings--linked to the LC authority files--that have been intellectually mapped to Dewey numbers by the DDC editors and statistically mapped to Dewey numbers in OCLC's WorldCat database.
More information about CORC is available on the OCLC Web site <http://www.oclc.org/oclc/corc/>.
For more information:
Nita Dean +1-614-761-5002
nita_dean@oclc.org
Return to Table of Contents
DUBLIN CORE RELEASES RECOMMENDED QUALIFIERS TO IMPROVE ACCESS TO INFORMATION
DUBLIN, Ohio, July 21, 2000--The Dublin Core Metadata Initiative (DCMI), an organization leading the development of international standards to improve electronic resource management and information discovery, has announced the formal recommendation of the
Dublin Core (DC) Qualifiers. The addition of the DC Qualifiers enhances the semantic precision of the existing DC Metadata Element Set.
For the past year, working groups of the Dublin Core developed these newly agreed upon refinements to give better access to information. The new recommendations for Dublin Core Qualifiers increase the effectiveness of metadata by giving it finer granulari
ty For example, a publication's date, which would be the Dublin Core Metadata Element, may be further detailed as a particular type of date by using a Dublin Core Qualifier such as date last modified, date created or date issued.
"Think of Legos," said Stuart Weibel, OCLC consulting research scientist and DCMI director. "The close tolerances of these simple toys ensure all the different Lego themes, built at different times, can work together smoothly Dublin Core is
the basic Lego block for promoting discovery of resources on the Web: a simple and interoperable foundation upon which many information solutions can be built. The introduction of Dublin Core Qualifiers is like adding color and themes to the Legos-it hel
ps enrich the description of information resources on the Internet."
The DC Qualifiers build upon the DC Metadata Element Set, which provides 15 categories to describe resources on the Web. Known as the Dublin Core, the metadata model has become the de facto standard for description of information on the Internet.
Dublin Core's usage committee has launched the next step toward cohesive metadata standard. The DC Qualifiers improve interpretation of metadata values and can be easily recorded or transferred into HTML, XML, RDF or relational databases. The evolution of
DC Qualifiers draws from the input of many individuals across a broad array of disciplines.
Users include museum informatics specialists, archivists, digital library researchers, libraries, and government information providers and a variety of content providers. Their efforts have led standards organizations, such as NISO (National Information S
tandards Organization) in the U.S. and CEN in Europe (European Committee for Standardization) to view the DC Metadata Element Set as a benchmark candidate for simple resource description on the Internet. More recently, new sectors, such as education and i
ndustry, have been attracted to Dublin Core's simplicity, multilingual scope, consensus philosophy and widespread adoption.
More information about the new recommendation can be found at:
http://purl.org/dc/documents/dcmes-qualifiers
Return to Table of Contents
BOOK REVIEWS
Vicki Toy-Smith, Column Editor
Cataloging With AACR2R and USMARC: For Books, Computer Files,
Serials, Sound Recordings, Videorecordings.
By Deborah A. Fritz.
This book is not a book with detailed explanations of how to catalog different types of material complete with examples. It is not a compilation of all of AACR2 or all the rule interpretations or the entire MARC format, and it does not cover every type of
material a library might catalog. It is a manual to keep beside one s computer to use in searching for bibliographic records, checking to see if they match the material in hand, editing records, making new records for different editions, and inputting or
iginal records for the types of material most commonly cataloged by libraries. The author has worked in cataloging since 1985 and has taught cataloging workshops since 1989. This book is an outgrowth of the handout for those workshops.
This book includes an introduction which discusses cataloging tools and the relationship between cataloging rules and MARC formats and this manual, a section on general cataloging steps, a separate section with more detailed information for each format, a
section describing the most commonly used MARC tags, a chapter on choice of main and added entries, and three appendices and an index.
The appendices consist of a MARC indicator table, an end of field punctuation table, and a sources of information table.
This is a very long book--580 pages, and it is published in loose-leaf format so it can be kept up to date by periodic issuing of new and replacement pages. This is a reprint edition with a publication date of May 1999. It incorporates the changes include
d in Update #1, January 1998 and Update #2, May 1999. It is good that this book is designed for updating as cataloging rules change all the time.
This is a very useful handbook for someone trying to learn to catalog a particular type of material or someone who is cataloging a type of material he or she does not often catalog. I have been cataloging audio-visual material for even longer than the aut
hor has, and I learned several things from this book. My only criticism is that the lines forming the grid in some of the tables are so faint that it makes it hard to read the table as it is makes the cells run together. I would recommend this book for al
l cataloging departments.
Published in 1998 by: American Library Association, Chicago (ix, 580 p.). ISBN 0-8389-0728-8. $60.00 (ALA members $54.00).
Reviewed by Katherine L. Rankin
University of Nevada, Las Vegas
Return to Table of Contents
EVERYTHING YOU ALWAYS WANTED TO KNOW
ABOUT AV CATALOGING
PLEASE ASK!
Nancy B. Olson
Time does fly when you are retired! I can't believe it is past time to have another OLAC column ready, though the bin into which I toss things to write about is overflowing. I taught a week in San Jose and a week in Pittsburgh and enjoyed both experiences
-- in San Jose I persuaded Michael Gorman to leave a committee meeting in the next building and talk to my class; in Pittsburgh a broken city water main shortened the week for most of us. I hope to teach in San Jose again in January and July and Pittsbur
gh in July; with (maybe) an additional workshop or two elsewhere. I look forward to seeing many of you in Seattle.
More on cataloging Internet Resources
In San Jose, where students needing a letter grade must do an extra project involving selecting and cataloging 10 Internet resources, there was discussion about how to catalog resources with no publication information. I went through the rules involving S
.1. and sn. -- after thinking about it overnight, I suggested these items, as well as those with no author, might not b~ worth cataloging. When selecting Internet resources, there must be some indication of authority of the content to justify the work of
cataloging. An author statement on the item, with indication of the status and qualifications of the author is one thing to look for. Another indication of value might be the place of publication -- a university or government agency or research institute.
An Internet resource without any of this information might look important, but we have no way to judge the accuracy or completeness of the data it contains.
511 Indicators
Some OCLC users seem to be confused about indicators for field 511, the participant or performer note. Only two indicators are valid:
0 No print constant provided
1 Cast
Confusion arises because other indicators were used in the past, so OCLC records exist with those other indicators, which were made obsolete during the format integration process. If you want a note to have specific wording to introduce a name or list of
names, use indicator "0" and begin the note with the word or words desired:
0 Narrator: Charles Osgood.
Field 511 is used for participants, narrators, presenters, or performers. If a narrator is heard but not seen, that narrator is named in field 508, creation! production credits note. Field 508 is used for "individuals or organizations (other than mem
bers of a cast) who have participated in the artistic or technical production of.an item ... "Field 508 is used for those behind the camera, 511 for those in front of the camera.
Running time in the fixed field
Verna Urbanski emailed me this week that she had been cataloging sets of slides and was finding lots of newly input bibliographic records on OCLC with the number of slides in a set in the fixed field "Time" - this was the practice before 1985, b
ut it is NOT to be done now "Time" is for the running time of a film; other visual materials are to be coded "nnn" in this field.
As in the previous question, one will find older records in OCLC with other coding, but this no longer is valid.
What to do when you find newly input bibliographic records improperly coded? I'll check with Jay Weitz and report in the next column.
Compact discs: 500 or 538
There was considerable discussion on Autocat recently about the "Compact disc" note used in cataloging sound recordings. Matthew Wise, Chair, Bibliographic Control Committee, Music Library Association, explained on Autocat on August 15 that an e
xample was added in March 1996 to field 538 (system details note) in the MARC Bibliographic Format with the text "Compact disc." In 1998 the Music Library Association objected to this coding, as they felt this was a physical description note rat
her than a system details note, and should be coded 500 rather than 538. They also pointed out the Library of Congress codes this information into field
500.
The MARC 21 Bibliographic Format does not contain this example in field 538, and Wise encourages anyone cataloging a compact disc to code this information into field 500. He points out that it will take some time to reflect this change in printed document
ation.
My personal feeling is that this information does convey to the user what kind of system is required to use the item being described - we used to put (VHS) in field 300 after the running time, but it was moved in the process of revising chapter 9 years ag
o - when it was found that similar information for computer files was much more extensive. At that time a decision was made by JSC to put all such information about equipment required for use of the item into a separate note; for computer files this note
would begin "System requirements:" but for videorecordings it would simply say "VHS" or "Beta" or whatever was appropriate. No note would be used when the equipment needed was obvious from the specific material designation u
sed at the beginning of field 300.
As one who cataloged all types of material, each variation from chapter to chapter creates confusion. The whole concept of format integration was to treat the same type of information the same way wherever encountered - allowing exemptions because of trad
ition, or because certain user groups demand them, makes cataloging more complicated for those who must catalog everything.
GMD for Audiobooks
A questioner asked what GMD to use for books on CD. These things are sound recordings, whether on sound cassette, or sound disc. The GMD for audiobooks or talking books is [sound recording].
Main entry for CD-ROMs
Another questioner asked about the choice of main entry for a CD-ROM title. There are no special rules in AACR2 chapter 21 for choice of main entry for computer files. One chooses main entry just as for another type of cataloging. However, most commercial
computer programs or packages involve "diffuse responsibility" and fall into the title main entry rule. Even if the chief source of information clearly states "by Arthur T. Author" (and that would be recorded in field 245 subfield c)
other information might indicate that, while Author had the original idea. Company ABC did the programing and Company XYZ did the artwork, animation, and music. In this case, I would choose title main entry.
There is no correlation between information appearing in the statement of responsibility and the choice of main entry under AACR2 as there was prior to 1968. Each decision is made independently
Odd sizes of CD-ROMs
There were some messages on Autocat during July about odd CD-ROM sizes, and Sandy Roe brought me two she picked up at exhibits during ALA this summer. Each is 8 cm. in diameter (and I hope the revision of chapter 9 will go to metric measurements as in the
rest of AACR2), but the top and bottom of each is cut off. One is 6 cm. tall, the other 6.5 cm. tall. The 6.5 x 8 cm. CD-ROM is a "geographic products sampler" from Census 2000.
The 6 cm. x 8 cm. CD-ROM is a demo disc from a company called Web Feet. Autocat users mentioned that they are coming with books, and that they are available in computer stores. They are supposed to work in a standard CD-ROM drive. Size in inches would be
2 1/2 or 2 3/4 x 3 1/4 in., rounding up the next 1/ 4 inch.
I think I would do something like this:
1 computer optical disc ; 3 1/4 diam., cut to 2 1/2 x 3 1/4 in.
Video information in 245 $c, and order of that information
There has been discussion on the OLAC list the past few days about what information should appear in the statement of responsibility for videos, and in what order it should be used. The questioner cited AACR2 1.1F6 and Archival Moving Image Materials.
There are specific rules on the statement of responsibility for film/video in AACR2 7. iFi, as well as two rule interpretations that appeared in Cataloging Service Bulletin 11 and 36. Briefly, corporate bodies having overall responsibility for the product
ion of a film are named in the statement of responsibility, and traditionally given before any personal names. People having some degree of overall responsibility such as producers, directors, and writers are named in the statement of responsibility; cast
members and others may be named in notes. Because both rules and LCRIs are extensive, they should be read in full. When reading the rules, also look at 7.7B6 and its LCRIs, as those not named in the statement of responsibility may be named on notes and t
he rules and LCRIs for the Area 1 and for Area 7 should be read together.
Future of DVD cataloging?
I don't know how DVDs will be handled when the rule revision process is
finished. The ISBD(ER) included DVDs in its list of electronic resources for which the ISBD was developed.
The Joint Steering Committee for Revision of Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules (JSC) announced in November 1999 a summary of decisions made at their October 1999 meeting in Brisbane, Australia. (http://www.nlc-bnc.ca/jsc/index.html) JSC endorsed the following change (among many others) and stated there would be a substantial revision of Chapter 9 in the process of bringing AACR2 into alignment with ISBD(ER).
"The terms "CD-ROM," "Photo CD," and "DVD" will be used directly in the physical description area."
OCLC, in its document "Cataloging Electronic Resources: OCLC-MARC Coding Guidelines" (May 15, 2000, http://www.oclc.org/connexion/documentation/type.htm), defines electronic resources and goes o
n to say "This definition does not include electronic resources that do not require the use of a computer, for example, music compact discs and videodiscs." This is the .policy we are to follow until/unless there are any rule changes.
We'll have to wait to see what happens at the JSC meeting in September, during which final changes to the revised chapter 9 were to have been approved. ALA CC:DA has appointed a Task Force for one year to investigate areas 3 and 5 in chapter 9 and to disc
uss remote access files in general. This and other factors may delay any decisions by JSC.
For now, DVDs that are feature films, or television programs, or similar in content to videos, are cataloged as videodiscs, with the appropriate dimension, and as many notes as may be needed (and those DVDs that include lots of supplementary material may
need lots of notes). I hope this does not change.
The ALA representative to JSC is Brian Schottlaender (see interview with him in newest CCQ). I suggest each of us contact him to encourage JSC to leave video/film DVDs in AACR2 chapter 7, and put DVD-ROM in chapter 9.
Brian E. C. Schottlaender
University Librarian
Geisel Library,
9500 Gelman Drive 0175G
University of California, San Diego
La Jolla CA 92093-0175
becs@ucsd.edu
Contact Nancy B. Olson at
P0 Box 734
Lake Crystal MN 56055
avnancy@ic. mankato. inn. us
(please put in the subject line "Question for Nancy")
Phone: 507-726-2985
Return to Table of Contents
IN MEMORY Of CRYSTAL GRAHAM
Crystal Graham, 47, a librarian at the University of California, San Diego (UCSD), passed away on Thursday August 10, 2000. Her valiant battle of many years against a debilitating arthritis typified Crystal's spirit. She exemplified strength and courage,
and her ability to overcome adversity was an inspiration to us all at
UCSD.
Crystal was an extraordinary librarian and a giant in the field of bibliographic control. She was a strong and articulate leader, and her vision helped inspire dramatic changes in cataloging standards. Her passion for improved bibliographic access was alw
ays framed in terms of the needs of the library users; her goals always related to making easier to find. She will be missed as a leader, a colleague, and a friend.
Some of Crystal's many accomplishments include:
- in 1998, receiving the Bowker/Ulrich's Serials Librarianship award;
- in 1997, being invited to participate in the International Conference on
the Principles and Future Development of AACR in Toronto, where her coauthored paper "Issues Related to Seriality" stimulated a thorough
reconsideration of bibliographic standards for serials;
- in 1995, being invited to participate in the ALCTS Preconference AACR
2000: The Future of the Descriptive Cataloging Rules in Chicago;
- in 1990, being asked to serve as a Visiting Program Officer for the
Association of Research Libraries, charged with preparing guidelines for
the creation of bibliographic records for preservation microform masters;
- in 1989, being invited to participate in the Airlie House Multiple Versions
Forum in Warrenton, VA, which led to an ideology of consolidated
bibliographic records for equivalent formats.
Crystal's career in librarianship began in 1976 with a graduate assistantship to the Latin American bibliographer at Indiana University Upon receiving both an M.A. in Latin American Studies and an M.L.S. there in 1977, she took a position at Cornell Unive
rsity as the Associate CONSER Project Director. In 1979, she moved to New York University as a serials cataloger. Crystal came to UCSD in February 1986 as a science monographs cataloger, eventually holding the position as Head, Digital Information and Ser
ials Cataloging Team.
Crystal had a strong love of reading, ice-skating, dance, and the movies. Her husband, Neil Stuart, asks that memorial contributions be made either to the Arthritis Foundation or to the Freedom to Read Foundation.
Linda Barnhart, Catalog Dept. Head, UCSD Libraries
Return to Table of Contents
Last modified: March 7, 2001
URL:
http://www.olacinc.org/newsletters/sept00.html
HTML version created by Sue Neumeister (neumeist@buffalo.edu)
Return
to OLAC Newsletter index