TREATMENT OF BIBLIOGRAPHIC SERIES: Thoughts and Actions Regarding Library of Congress Policy Changes
Latest update December 12, 2006
This is a discussion/news document in reaction to the decision by the Library of Congress to stop tracing series and creating/updating series authority records beginning June 1, 2006 (initially May 1).
ALA testimony against LC (July 27)
ALCTS Statement on LC series decision
ARL Director's letter to LC
Backstage Library Works series authorities processing options
BREAKING NEWS
Canada:
Library and Archives Canada continues controlling series
Library of Congress' Decision to Cease Creating Series Authority Records
Music Library Association's Response to the LC Series Authority Decision (May 25, 2006)
OCLC response to LC series decision (June 21)
PCC FAQ about series
PCC Statement on LC Series Authorities
Petition: Prevent the Library of Congress from Abandoning the Creation of Series Authority Records
Summary of LC changes to series work
LOCAL:
Local thoughts and questions
MERLIN Quality Control Standards revised
MERLIN re-indexing series statement field
Message sent to MU Libraries staff
Message sent to MQCC from MU with suggestions (local)
MU Series Policies and Procedures (revised)
Potential strategies (local)
Proposal to Stop Creating Authority Records and Tracing Unnumbered Series --MU Libraries
Questions to ponder (local)
At the request of the MERLIN Quality Control Committee the not traced series statement field (490 0_) has been indexed as an exact title field (uncontrolled).This has been accomplished on records starting June 6, 2006.
UMKC will continue to create Series Authority Records to the OCLC authority file (NACO), will download those records into MERLIN for everyone's use. MU Libraries Catalog Dept. is continuing discussions on this issue.
Breaking news (newest first)
|
In Canada, a Different National Decision on Series Authority Records
Unlike the Library of Congress, the national library (Library and Archives Canada (LAC)) thinks such records should stay. (from Library Journal Academic Newswire, September 21, 2006) |
| |
From the INSIDE HIGHER ED web site (July 28, 2006):
Calling Melvil Dewey
Efforts to simplify catalog systems at the Library of Congress may soon make scholarly research a lot more complicated. Many librarians argue that moves by the nation's oldest federal cultural institution could hinder the ability of professors and students nationwide to gather information.... Read more |
| |
| LOCAL: MQCC Standards revisions regarding series (July 28, 2006) |
| |
| ALA submits testimony against Library of Congress cataloguing changes (July 27, 2006) |
| |
| LOCAL: A statement and attached draft of revisions/changes to standards for series were sent to MERLIN Quality Control members for consideration at the upcoming July 28th meeting. |
| |
| Backstage Library Works series authorities processing options (interesting flexibility). |
| |
|
| |
| Email from Carolyn Sturtevant (BIBCO Coordinator,
Library of Congress) regarding CONSER/BIBCO Series meeting at ALA, with links to documents for discussion (6/21/06) |
| |
CORRECTION TO "SERIES AT ALA" IN PREVIOUS ISSUE :
The Joint ALCTS CCS/PCC Series Authority Workshop Pilot, "The Process of Series Authority Control," announced in the article "Series at ALA" in LCCN v. 14, no. 3 (June 2006), will not take place. All are welcome to attend the Joint Workshop on Series in Bibliographic Records Pilot to be held Saturday, June 24, 1:30- 3:30 pm, New Orleans Marriott, Mardi Gras A-C. |
| |
| LC
Cataloging Newsline June 2006: Series Decision; related meetings at ALA
Annual Conference in New Orleans. |
| |
| Program for Cooperative Cataloging Frequently Asked Questions about Series
Question #15 clarifies some of LC decisions |
| |
OCLC's Response to the Library of Congress Decision on Controlled Series Access
(includes ability to change series without enhance capabilities and OCLC can create change or add series authority records) |
| |
| MERLIN has now been re-indexed so that the 490 0_ field (series statement/not traced) can be retrieved with an exact title search on bibliographic records with a create date of June 6, 2006. |
| |
PCC Statement on LC Series Authority Record Change
PCC Libraries are encouraged to continue series work following established standards. |
| |
| Letter from [ARL-DIRECTORS] to Deanna Marcum (Associate Librarian for Library Services, Library of Congress) regarding series decisions |
| |
| ALCTS announces New Forum On Series Authority Records (June 23, ALA Annual Conference). |
| |
| Beacher Wiggins communication to his colleagues at LC regarding series (LC will not detrace series already traced in OCLC). |
| |
| ALA/ALCTS Board of Directors Statement in Response to Library of Congress decision regarding series |
| |
| The Catalog Dept. is creating MERLIN lists to capture series on Standing Order, those with classed together call numbers, and numbered series. They will be exported to spreadsheets for perusal by Public Services and Technical Services staff to be sure any steps we take are inclusive. |
| |
----Original Message-----
From: AUTOCAT [ mailto:AUTOCAT@LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU ] On Behalf Of Douglas Winship
Sent: Monday, May 01, 2006 12:54 PM
To: AUTOCAT@LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU
Subject: [ACAT] Delay: LC's SARs decision implementation
[This appears to be fairly widely circulated, but no one at LC sent it to AUTOCAT, so ... Douglas ]
This is to let you know that the Acquisitions & Bibliographic Access Directorate at the Library of Congress is delaying implementation of the decision to cease series authority control until June 1, 2006, due to the multiple concerns expressed by external institutions. As stated previously, any comments may be directed to:
Mr. Beacher Wiggins
Director, Acquisitions and Bibliographic Access Library of Congress
101 Independence Ave , SE
Washington DC 20540-4200
202-707-5325 (phone)
202-707-6269 (fax)
bwig@loc.gov (e-mail) |
| |
| BIBCO and CONSER recommendations to the PCC Policy Committee (May 01, 2006) |
Breaking news addenda
A partial listing of what is referred to above.
Message sent to MU Libraries staff list April 28, 2006
|
I mentioned in the MU Libraries Selector's meeting this morning that the Library of Congress had announced that they intend to stop following standards in their treatment of bibliographic series. They intend to
- Stop tracing series (provide exact title access)
- Recode series fields in records contributed by other libraries so they are no longer traced in the LC catalog (many of these are then loaded back to OCLC, removing access) (later rescinded)
- Stop creating series authority records
- Create individual records for monographic sets that have volume titles
- Not update holdings for existing monographic set records.
An abbreviated list of what LC will, and will not do, is attached. This is from a letter sent to officials of the Program for Cooperative Cataloging and sent out from their list.
There is now an online petition asking LC to reverse that decision. We encourage interested parties to read the petition and sign it. The response appears to be quite strong.
MU Ellis and HSL cataloging staff have been discussion this issue since it was announced, and have formulated some suggestions for discussion with the MERLIN Quality Control Committee. They were formulated assuming the Library of Congress would go forward with this decision. They follow.
MU Ellis & HSL catalogers discussed the LC decision to discontinue tracing series and creating series authority records. Here are our ideas for MQCC discussion.
1. Add an index rule to index 490 0_ in the MERLIN exact title index (from specified date forward). Do not re-index the MERLIN catalog. Retain existing rule to index 490 0_ in the MERLIN keyword index (to provide keyword access to 490 0_ bibliographic with create date prior to the date of exact title indexing).
2. MERLIN cataloging centers will no longer routinely create or import series authority records for series. MERLIN cataloging centers may create or import series authority records for new series the institution desires to trace under a controlled authority heading to maintain consistent treatment in bibliographic records if they agree to maintain them.
3. MQCC should devise a method to identify which cataloging center is responsible for maintenance of series in item 2 above (perhaps a 690 note in the authority record).
Suggested alternative series authority messages :
690 MAINTAINED |5 UMC
690 NOT MAINTAINED |5 UMC
4. Stay tuned to PCC (and other) discussions regarding this LC decision and possible alternatives in the national cooperative effort.
In the meantime, MU catalogers will continue to:
1. Check new acquisitions for the presence of a series authority record and follow existing local treatment.
2. Process series reported on MERLIN "new headings" and "no match" reports.
|
LOCAL THOUGHTS AND QUESTIONS
GENERALITIES
Realize that if LC does not make meaningful exceptions to its new policies we cannot continue to maintain series authority records or tracing practice as we have previously, except in limited categories (at least until we can identify efficient ways to maintain those exceptions).
- Selective tracing would be more successful on materials not routinely cataloged by LC (PCC?).
- Consider maintaining tracing/authorities practice (at least temporarily) for series that are classified together, series on Standing Order, and series chosen because of their local importance. Public Services staff should be involved in selection of series needing control.
- For series on Standing Order, we could identify them locally by creating a list of series that need to be searched prior to ordering to prevent duplication
- Our Approval profile already identifies our STO series and de-selects them (continued identification problems for title and series statement changes?).
- Classed together series:
- We could identify classed together series by MERLIN Boolean list and, over time, change the practice to classify separately, particularly to materials cataloged by LC cataloging. The efficiency of classifying titles together is only of value if LC does not catalog them.
- Problems: patrons are accustomed to finding a series together on the shelf, and some series by their nature should be classified together
- Series of local importance:
These would need to be limited in number and maintained by the interested library.
- Numbered series:
Identification and authority control of numbered series would be likely be of greater value than that of unnumbered series.
- Ask to have the 490 0_ field indexed as an uncontrolled title (accomplished). This would maintain an exact title search for our patrons who access materials in this manner. Indexing these would do nothing for collocation, but would allow retrieval as titles changed without the use of cross references. Exclude 490 1_ from the index change to avoid redundancies on the legacy records.
- Problems: generic titles (e.g. Bulletin)
- Series with subseries
- Should we stop routinely tracing and creating authority records for unnumbered series, assuming they are a less significant access point for our users?
- For series we decide to trace and maintain authority records for, MERLIN Libraries could agree to code authority records with a note to identify series authority that would be maintained and who would maintain them (Example: 690 MAINTAINED |5 UMC|5UMR or, alternatively: 690 NOT MAINTAINED |5 UMC).
- We could maintain/enhance see references in authority records to direct staff and users from 490 0_ series statements with statements of responsibility to the authorized form (a rough attempt at collocation).
QUESTIONS TO PONDER
- Should we maintain authority records that document a change from not analyzed to analyzed? We could leave them in place so they could be identified as needed since they are not seen by the public.
- LC series policy would apply to sets with analyzable titles. Would this also pertain to sets for an author's or composer's works that have traditionally been classified together? Collocation there is clearly more important than subject based sets. Shouldn't we maintain existing sets (problems of identifying them?)?
- Would LC treat the set title, prominent by typography and likely the best known element of the work, as an uncontrolled 490 0_ or would they retain the set title in the 245 |a and represent the volume title in |n and |p?
Summary of LC changes to series work
|
What LC catalogers will do:
- Create a separate bibliographic record for all resources with distinctive titles published as parts of series (monographic series and multipart monographs)
- Give series statements in 490 0 fields
- Classify separately each volume (i.e., assign call number and subject headings appropriate to the specific topic of the volume). (Imported copy cataloging records will have series access points removed and series statements changed to 490 0)
What LC catalogers will not do :
- Create new SARs
- Modify existing SARs to update data elements or LC's treatment decisions
- Consult and follow treatment in existing SARs
- Update existing collected set records
- Change 4XX/8XX fields in completed bibliographic records when updating those records for other reasons
|
|
