headers
James Weinheimer | 2 Jul 11:27

Re: Metadata Standards. Was: Publisher/Vendor supplied records (fwd)

On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 20:24:00 +1000, Hal Cain <hecain@...> wrote:

>First, publishers' metadata is of very variable quality.  There are  
>quite prestigious publishers who fail to correct the metadata in their  
>catalogue database, offered for public searching, when a  
>pre-publication title (which may be just the production department's  
>working title -- the book they're doing has to have *some* sort of  
>name, after all) is changed for publication.  And they may fail to  
>identify that something they announce is in fact an unchanged reprint  
>of something originally published by a firm they acquired five years  
>ago.  If such publishers can't deal with their metadata when  
>correction is clearly in their own interests, why bother?

Yes, publisher's metadata is of variable quality, but--and we read this all
the time on AUTOCAT so we might as well face it: ours isn't so great,
either. I was out of AACR2 cataloging for awhile, and now that I am back, I
am really surprised at how far library cataloging has deteriorated. I don't
believe it's because people are less intelligent than before--it's a matter
of training and/or time. "Training" especially for people who are already
working at a task, means "change." In this case, it means change for people
who work in publishers' databases, but also for us.

Although an individual cataloger may do a great job, it doesn't matter to
the world at large since the single records get lost in the bibliographic
ocean. Very few people, especially the people who make the decisions, really
understand the difference between a good bibliographic record and a bad
bibliographic record.

The only people who can point out the differences between good records and
bad records are catalogers, and not only do they have to point out the
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 501 comments |
headers
Whitsitt, Kathleen S | 2 Jul 15:26

Re: Subject authority records for validation purposes

Does anyone know whether the LoC intends to create authority records for
$155 genre headings that may contain subheading strings?  And if so, in
which particular situations?

My own initial opinion is that this would greatly overcomplicate most
authority files, and tend to negate the purpose of putting genre/form in
a separate tag to begin with.

Also, isn't about time to start thinking about distinguishing genres
from publication forms from literary forms, etc., by distinctive Marc
coding or other means?

Kathleen Whitsitt
Authority Control Librarian
North Harris Montgomery CCD

-----Original Message-----
From: AUTOCAT [mailto:AUTOCAT@...] On Behalf Of Daniel
CannCasciato
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 11:17 AM
Subject: Subject authority records for validation purposes

>>> CPSO <cpso@...> 6/29/2007 6:26 AM >>>
Message may be forwarded to other lists as appropriate
*********************************************

As announced in the CDS bulletin of May 25 2007 <
http://www.loc.gov/cds/notices/2007-05-25-Subject_Authority_Validation_R
ecords.pdf > CPSO has begun a project to create subject authority
records for every subject string appearing in bibliographic records to
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 501 comments |
headers
Whitsitt, Kathleen S | 2 Jul 15:31

Systems that link to authority file

Yes, when LC updated the authority record for "Vietnamese Conflict,
1961-1975" to "Vietnam War, 1961-1975", our authority vendor Marcive
sent us the updated authority record, which I import and overlay on the
old record using the LCCN as a match point.  This immediately updates
all the bib records attached to the authority.  The global replace is a
feature of Horizon, and in this case I would select the system generated
authority records (the one's with subject/subheading strings), invoke
the global replace feature which prompts for the character string to be
replaced, and the character string to replace with.  It will not replace
or adjust multiple subheadings however.  It is very useful for closing
dates where appropriate.

Kathleen

-----Original Message-----

From: AUTOCAT [mailto:AUTOCAT@...] On Behalf Of Rinne,
Nathan (ESC)

Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 10:26 AM

Subject: Re: Publisher/Vendor supplied records/passed through well-
respected Academic libraries

Kathleen,

I have a couple of clarification questions.  If you don't have time to
respond, I understand (and please feel no guilt!).  I'm not posting this
to the whole list because I assume only I can't figure the details out.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Whitsitt, Kathleen S | 2 Jul 15:33

Systems that link to authority file

Yes, when LC updated the authority record for "Vietnamese Conflict,
1961-1975" to "Vietnam War, 1961-1975", our authority vendor Marcive
sent us the updated authority record, which I import and overlay on the
old record using the LCCN as a match point.  This immediately updates
all the bib records attached to the authority.  The global replace is a
feature of Horizon, and in this case I would select the system generated
authority records (the one's with subject/subheading strings), invoke
the global replace feature which prompts for the character string to be
replaced, and the character string to replace with.  It will not replace
or adjust multiple subheadings however.  It is very useful for closing
dates where appropriate.

Kathleen

-----Original Message-----

From: AUTOCAT [mailto:AUTOCAT@...] On Behalf Of Rinne,
Nathan (ESC)

Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 10:26 AM

Subject: Re: Publisher/Vendor supplied records/passed through well-
respected Academic libraries

Kathleen,

I have a couple of clarification questions.  If you don't have time to
respond, I understand (and please feel no guilt!).  I'm not posting this
to the whole list because I assume only I can't figure the details out.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Whitsitt, Kathleen S | 2 Jul 15:30

Re: Systems that link to authority file

-----Original Message-----
From: Whitsitt, Kathleen S 
Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 8:12 AM
To: AUTOCAT; Rinne, Nathan (ESC)
Subject: RE: Re: Publisher/Vendor supplied records/passed through well-
respected Academic libraries

Yes, when LC updated the authority record for "Vietnamese Conflict,
1961-1975" to "Vietnam War, 1961-1975", our authority vendor Marcive
sent us the updated authority record, which I import and overlay on the
old record using the LCCN as a match point.  This immediately updates
all the bib records attached to the authority.  The global replace is a
feature of Horizon, and in this case I would select the system generated
authority records (the one's with subject/subheading strings), invoke
the global replace feature which prompts for the character string to be
replaced, and the character string to replace with.  It will not replace
or adjust multiple subheadings however.  It is very useful for closing
dates where appropriate.

Kathleen

-----Original Message-----
From: AUTOCAT [mailto:AUTOCAT@...] On Behalf Of Rinne,
Nathan (ESC)
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 10:26 AM
Subject: Re: Publisher/Vendor supplied records/passed through well-
respected Academic libraries

Kathleen,
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Gordon Pew | 2 Jul 15:56
Picon
Favicon

Variation on a theme (of uselessness)

I've written (ranted?) before about the futility of publishers' putting 
into books statements like "Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication 
available" (but not the cataloging itself) and variants thereof. Today I 
came across a new wrinkle (in an English-language book published in 
Germany).  On the t.p. verso, I read the usual claim that British Library 
Cataloging in Publication data" is available from the British Library (but 
of course without said cataloging actually appearing).  It then reads 
"Library of Congress control number available: http://www.loc.gov".   Going 
to the LoC catalog, I indeed find a vestigal record for the book (The 
Syro-Aramaic reading of the Koran / Christoph Luxenberg.  ISBN 13: 
9783889030888).  But why did the publisher choose to alert us to the 
existence of the LCCN?  I guess it was a useful note, but it struck me as 
an oddball thing.

Gordon Pew
Head of Copy Cataloging and Database Management
Harvard Law School Library
164 Langdell Hall
1545 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, Mass. 02138
gpew@...
(617) 495-4487

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

E-mail AUTOCAT listowners:             autocat-request@...
Search AUTOCAT archives:  http://listserv.syr.edu/archives/autocat.html
Selected AUTOCAT commands: http://www.cwu.edu/~dcc/Autocat/options.html
  By posting messages to AUTOCAT, the author does not cede copyright
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Mike Tribby | 2 Jul 16:24

Re: Variation on a theme (of uselessness)

Gordon Pew asks: "why did the publisher choose to alert us to the existence
of the LCCN?"

Why indeed. This is a frequent question around here, though as often as not
it's asked in relation to applications for P-CIP. The simple answer, at
least for our domestic small publishers, is that all of the self-publishing
manuals and how-to handbooks for self- and small-publishers say that an LCCN
is a necessity, especially if one is unable to obtain LC CIP. Given that
staff from LC's CIP Division also encourage authors and publishers whose
works don't qualify for full CIP to obtain LCCNs (from the PCN program for
which eligibility is not as tightly controlled), we also advise them to
obtain an LCCN. Once their books are picked up, whether by LC or OCLC, the
LCCN is a good identifier if only because so many ISBNs are duplicated.

In practice other than performing PCIP, we often use these PCN-level records
as starting points for our cataloging. In fact most of these records are or
are the same as the skelatal vendor records complained about on this
bandwidth last week. My guess is that the ultimate reason a publisher would
put in the note that an LCCN for a title is available when CIP is not is
that they are seeking the legitmization of having some sort of standard
number with LC's imprimateur on it, quite possibly with an eye to improving
sales, a concern seldom addressed in this august forum. In this case, since
the publisher is located in Germany, they would not qualify for LC CIP.

Mike Tribby
Senior Cataloger
Quality Books Inc.
The Best of America's Independent Presses

mailto:mike.tribby@...
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Joel Hahn | 2 Jul 17:10
Favicon

Re: Academic Library uses DDC

J. McRee Elrod wrote:
> Neither of these factors influence us in recommending DDC/LCC
> reclassification to our clients.  The two main reasons are:
> 
> 1) More DLC records have 050 LCC than 082 DDC, 

That may be true over the entire breadth of DLC records, but how true
that will be for the records a given library actually needs (or in the
case of a reclass project, already has) depends on the nature and age of
their collection; when I was in library school, I did a rough survey of
DLC records in my consortium's catalog (at that time, a bit under 1
million bibligraphic records) and while I don't remember the exact
numbers off the top of my head, the rate of presence for both types of
call numbers was somewhere around 98% for recently-published material,
with LCC ahead by a statistically insigificant amount.  That's for a
consortium of public libraries with an emphasis on modern "popular"
material.

Also, the types of DLC records where you're least likely to find either
an LCC or DDC call number are those for AV, so a collection that is
heavy in that area will likewise likely want to weigh this factor more
lightly according to their specific needs.

> and most 050 LCC call
> numbers are complete, while 082 DDC are usually only class number.

Given a) how easy many catalogers insist that the LC cutter table is to
memorize (and how easy other Cutter schemes are to apply, whether
calculated via computer program or just taken from the first few letters
of a name/word) and b) how many catalogers have been decrying of late
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
J. McRee Elrod | 2 Jul 18:54
Picon

DDC vs. LCC

Joel Hahn said, after quoting me:

>> 2) The  continual reclassing as DDC insists upon changing class
>> numbers is too costly and time consuming ...

>(If LCC never changed to account for changes in >scholarship,
>technology, research, culture, etc.--thus requiring either reclass or
>splitting a topic in two or more numbers and hoping attrition
>"fixes" the problem--

LCC has does not issue phoenix schedules in which older class numbers
are given new meanings.  Introducing new class numbers for new
concepts is quite different from changing the meanings of existing
class numbers.  With LCC, newer works on a topic may be in a class
number different from older works, e.g., older law books crammed into
non law numbers prior to the publication of the K schedules, but you
don't have books on different topics appearing in the same number
because the number has been given a new meaning.  (LC does not itself,
I think, usually reclass items in its collection.)  

This is for me the basic and telling difference between DDC and LCC,
and why special libraries, which tend to keep materials for long
periods of time, find it advantageos to reclass to LCC.  With LCC, you
may have topics split by time of publication.  In DDC, without
reclassification, you have a mixed up mess.  DDC numbers in older
records for recent acquisitions have to be checked.

Even the telephone company does not rush to reassign a number, as does
DDC.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
MSHERMAN | 2 Jul 19:53
Favicon

Re: Variation on a theme (of uselessness)

7/2/07

Gordon and all (see, no et al.!)

While I cannot answer your question regarding the LCCN, I do have a comment on the first part of your
question. I visited the meeting of the CIP advisory group at ALA in Washington last week and discovered
that there is a movement afoot, to try to remove the publishers of CIP statements like that, from being able
to get CIP from LC at all. I don't know whether anything will come of it, but I'd love to be a fly on the wall at
the discussions ;-)

Maxine

Maxine Sherman, Cataloger
Cuyahoga County Public Library
2111 Snow Road
Parma, Ohio 44134
********************
Phone: 216-749-9378
Toll-free: 800-749-5560
FAX: 216-749-9445
********************
http://www.cuyahogalibrary.org
mailto:msherman@...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: AUTOCAT [mailto:AUTOCAT@...] On Behalf Of 
> Gordon Pew
> Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 9:57 AM
> To: AUTOCAT@...
> Subject: Variation on a theme (of uselessness)
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane