RSS Feeds
News ItemsUpcoming Events
August 7th
Support Staff Interest Group Meeting
August 8th
Picture Book Read-In--13th Annual Event
Support Staff Interest Group Meeting
Picture Book Read-In--13th Annual Event
29 January 2004 (1:30-4:00 pm)
Roger Abrams (Public Library of Cincinnati and Hamilton County), Galina Lewandowicz (graduate student, Kent State University), Judy Malone (GCLC), Aaron Smith (Clermont County Public Library), and Tracey Stivers (Cincinnati State Technical and Community College)
We introduced ourselves, with brief descriptions of our duties and responsibilities.
A few recent announcements of programs elsewhere had caught both Judy’s and Aaron’s eyes, and Judy was kind enough to prepare descriptions of a couple of potential programs that might work locally. She elaborated on the details involved in presenting such a program, and indicated that GCLC would do much of the prep work.
We first spoke favorably of the possibility of a program on public access catalog design and implementation and its potential effect on cataloging practice. There seems to be an ever-increasing impact on local systems and services from external users, from mining of MARC to the impact of resource sharing. We discussed design issues and resource sharing plans (the OhioLINK and MORE implementations in Ohio, KDLA/KYVL efforts in Kentucky, and the GCLC program) and the relatively hidden costs incurred.
We agreed that such a program, while desirable, presents few issues in cataloging other than the ongoing desire for adherence to MARC and AACR2 standards, which are important for all these system interfaces. If we move into a more universal application of FRBR standards, catalog adaptation will be necessary, but that will likely be in the more distant future. Judy will look into the content of the NOTSL program in Parma (May 21, 2004) and we will discuss via listserv.
A second program idea involved an exploration of the Cataloger’s Toolbox (offered in two parts by Carol Bradsher, a consultant and founder of Experiential Learning). At our meeting, I confused the title of this offering with Cataloger’s Desktop, a Library of Congress product, and I apologize for the confusion. Part one of Bradsher’s presentation description may be seen at
http://cemall.solorls.org/events.cfm?ID=594
and does not involve purchase of the LC product. It looks like the program is geared to more inexperienced staffers, but that may be necessary in your respective contexts. Please have a look at this program and let Judy (judy@gclc-lib.org) or me (smithaa@oplin.org) know if there is interest from your perspective.
Our reflections on the inputting of contents notes revealed that we are not generally enhancing them. Some of us do not edit them if already enhanced in downloaded copy, but we recognize the problems that enhanced notes may cause in title and other indexes if 505 subfields are included in system indexing. Without a solution in sight, we judge it better to leave un-enhanced, and depend on keyword access, as long as reference staff is informed.
In a brief discussion, we found that those in attendance tend to leave web links in imported records for tables of contents, but will remove such links if they lead to marketing-oriented information.
We decided that this effort by OCLC was most interesting, but may not have practical applications for some time, limited by the size of the experimental database (2 million records), the fact that OCLC does not reflect universal holdings, and the need for a user to have special knowledge (usage of the “Find in a library”: syntax) when entering a Google search.
We had a brief discussion concerning kits, agreeing that most circumvent the problem of cataloging kits by selecting a predominant medium and considering other material supplementary (300 subfield e, supported by notes). In the absence of a predominant medium, and in terms of GMDs, we note that AACR2r 2002 presents 2 lists (1.1C1) of GMDs, recommending list 2 (which includes the term “kit”) for U.S. libraries and list 1 (using the term “multimedia”) for British libraries. Next meeting: Thursday, July 29, 2004 (1:30-4:00 pm), at the GCLC offices. On the agenda will be an in-depth discussion and attempt to clarify what constitutes a “reprint” for cataloging purposes, as opposed to a situation where “publication and copyright date differ.”
Respectfully submitted, Aaron