July 10, 2007
Rehashed Serials Cataloging meeting.
The SerCat group agreed that Gov Pubs did not need to create series authority records for classed-together series when a full serial bib record was present (Cataloging may continue to create SAFs and consult them first). Serial records do need to reflect the form of the volume (numbering example). If both a bib and an authority record do exist, they need to agree. The strongest arguments for allowing Gov Pubs to stop creating them were: 1) GP will by far be dealing with the largest number of CT series, since Cataloging now gets shelf-ready records, and 2) it does seem like a waste of time, especially when we'd need to do them originally, to create records just to suppress them. We need to make sure our series fields in monographic analytic records match the others in the series (in title, format of number especially), and that all catalogers know how to validate their headings.
There was marginal agreement that we could do the opposite for old series which come up during other processes (circ returns, etc.) --we could instead create just an authority record, as a place-holder, because 1) the person doing the processing (e.g. Denise or Irma, or even a serial cataloger who is not cataloging serials at the moment) might not be able to catalog serials, or might not be able to stop and catalog the whole series at that moment, and 2) they can't always give the series to someone else to catalog because that person is busy, too. Jina did not see how everyone could be too busy to take on a series right away. Nevertheless, there was an understanding that the authority record would be a temporary fix until the serial could be cataloged. The authority record would not be suppressed until there was a serial record. We will probably stretch this agreement to cover new series for which there is not yet an OCLC serial record--a note should be added, though to the effect that each time a new volume is received, OCLC needs to be searched in case a record has been added. We will need to train Denise and Irma and whomever else does retrocataloging to import/edit or create local series authority records.
As a followup, Jina asked why we needed to create any serial records for C.T. series, the assumption possibly being that there would already be monographic records for every volume. Several reasons were listed: 1) The serial record holds all the same information as an authority record, plus it lists all holdings, whether the volumes are all cataloged or not (and thus takes the place of the shelf list); 2) Where we have some volumes in print and some online (not necessarily the same ones), the serial record gives access to the online volumes; 3) The serial record holds the order records; 4) Where citations are unclear, variant forms of the series title plus volume numbers can be tracked down in the serial record (in the monographic record, only the official form of the series is used); 5) There is a time gap between when a volume is checked in (serial record) and is cataloged as a monograph, during which we/patrons could tell that we had received it; 6) It will be many years, if ever, before we have monographic records for all our volumes. Not all these reasons were made clear in the SerCat meeting.
We will very soon be required to enter serial holdings in MARC format. Paul and Helene will be changing all existing records over. We should continue using the old format until we're trained in the new. For each serial, we will need to decide which level (probably 1-4--levels of detail) of MARC format is appropriate, get a Millennium prompt, then fill in the fields (which is or is not the same as invoking a standard "template", the distinction not being clear at the moment). Jina stressed that we (GovPubs) would have to comply, we assured her that we always had every intention to.
The SerCat group agreed that Gov Pubs did not need to create series authority records for classed-together series when a full serial bib record was present (Cataloging may continue to create SAFs and consult them first). Serial records do need to reflect the form of the volume (numbering example). If both a bib and an authority record do exist, they need to agree. The strongest arguments for allowing Gov Pubs to stop creating them were: 1) GP will by far be dealing with the largest number of CT series, since Cataloging now gets shelf-ready records, and 2) it does seem like a waste of time, especially when we'd need to do them originally, to create records just to suppress them. We need to make sure our series fields in monographic analytic records match the others in the series (in title, format of number especially), and that all catalogers know how to validate their headings.
There was marginal agreement that we could do the opposite for old series which come up during other processes (circ returns, etc.) --we could instead create just an authority record, as a place-holder, because 1) the person doing the processing (e.g. Denise or Irma, or even a serial cataloger who is not cataloging serials at the moment) might not be able to catalog serials, or might not be able to stop and catalog the whole series at that moment, and 2) they can't always give the series to someone else to catalog because that person is busy, too. Jina did not see how everyone could be too busy to take on a series right away. Nevertheless, there was an understanding that the authority record would be a temporary fix until the serial could be cataloged. The authority record would not be suppressed until there was a serial record. We will probably stretch this agreement to cover new series for which there is not yet an OCLC serial record--a note should be added, though to the effect that each time a new volume is received, OCLC needs to be searched in case a record has been added. We will need to train Denise and Irma and whomever else does retrocataloging to import/edit or create local series authority records.
As a followup, Jina asked why we needed to create any serial records for C.T. series, the assumption possibly being that there would already be monographic records for every volume. Several reasons were listed: 1) The serial record holds all the same information as an authority record, plus it lists all holdings, whether the volumes are all cataloged or not (and thus takes the place of the shelf list); 2) Where we have some volumes in print and some online (not necessarily the same ones), the serial record gives access to the online volumes; 3) The serial record holds the order records; 4) Where citations are unclear, variant forms of the series title plus volume numbers can be tracked down in the serial record (in the monographic record, only the official form of the series is used); 5) There is a time gap between when a volume is checked in (serial record) and is cataloged as a monograph, during which we/patrons could tell that we had received it; 6) It will be many years, if ever, before we have monographic records for all our volumes. Not all these reasons were made clear in the SerCat meeting.
We will very soon be required to enter serial holdings in MARC format. Paul and Helene will be changing all existing records over. We should continue using the old format until we're trained in the new. For each serial, we will need to decide which level (probably 1-4--levels of detail) of MARC format is appropriate, get a Millennium prompt, then fill in the fields (which is or is not the same as invoking a standard "template", the distinction not being clear at the moment). Jina stressed that we (GovPubs) would have to comply, we assured her that we always had every intention to.
posted by Government Publications Reference @ 4:04 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home