CCC

27 September 2007

Present:

Joan Swanekamp, Tony Oddo, Steven Arakawa, Rick Sarcia, Patricia Thurston (minutes), Nancy Lyon, Cindy Crooker, Beatrice Luh, Robert Killheffer, Tatiana Barr, Dorothy Rachmat, Edith Baradi, Karen Spicher, Daniel Lovins, Matthew Beacom, Marsha Garman, Sarah Elman, Eva Bolkovac, Eric Friede, Stephen Young, Jenn Nolte, Rowena Griem.

Guest: Larry Heiman

Announcements:

● RLG online documents scheduled to go away October 1, 2007.

● Cindy Crooker joins CCC as the Medical Library Representative. Original cataloging for the Medical Library will be done in Catalog & Metadata Services (SML)

● Rowena Griem joins CCC as the interim Science Cataloging Coordinator. She is scheduled to spend some time at Kline every week.

● Next CCC meeting will be October 25, 2007.

Reports of the Catalog and Metadata Services Vision task forces.

Joan talked about the overall work of the CMS task forces, and her wish to share the reports with CCC to see if there were additional thoughts or issues. Joan’s ultimate goal is to bring the task force reports to LMC

● Task Force on Core Level Cataloging. Larry Heiman, Chair.

Task Force report:

This document is intended primarily for print monographs, and non-print material in the print workflow. This document was not created for Rare Books and Special Collections, as Special Collections were out of the scope of the Task Force charge.

CPDC agreed that these recommendations would be advantageous. Comparison of the core/full records in the Bibco Participants Manual seemed to indicate that the major difference applied to the number of subject headings assigned. If the Shelflisting TF recommendation to bypass shelflisting was also adopted, then time would be saved when assigning call numbers.

Larry noted that Core allows for catalogers judgment. The standard defines the minimum, but a cataloger could enhance contents notes, or create additional subject headings when necessary.

CCC supported this document, and members felt they could apply the recommendations to their cataloging units.

● Task Force on Shelflisting. Tatiana Barr, Chair.

Task Force report:

As with the Core Level document above, the goal of these recommendations is to speed up copy and original cataloging, while maintaining access and accuracy in the catalog. The Task Force talked with Circulation Staff about monitoring duplicate call numbers. The Task Force talked with Research Services & Collections about access issues. Both units supported the work of the Task Force. CMS will monitor the number of duplicate call numbers returned from Circulation. If large numbers begin to appear, CMS will revisit the practice of bypassing shelflisting. The Task Force will look into the best reporting mechanism for keeping track of duplicate call number occurrences.

Several CCC members mentioned that their cataloging units had already implemented several elements of these shelflisting policies into their workflow. The group discussed concerns about split files for translations and new editions. It was noted that split files already exist for this kind of material because of the trailing X policy. CCC supported the Shelflisting TF recommendations.It was noted that these recommendations will have no impact on FastCat.

Outstanding issues:

Cuttering. The Core Level and Shelflisting documents recommend different approaches to cuttering. The task forces need to reconcile their documentation.

Manuscripts and Archives: Although the Core Level Report does not apply to Special Collections, MSSA would like to determine their own needs and see whether they might be able to apply some of the Core Level recommendations.

Training:

Joan mentioned training for Core Level record creation would be needed throughout the library, and should include both librarians and C&Ts. Training sessions would also be needed during the rollout of the shelflisting recommendations.

Because these recommendations signal major policy shifts, several CCC members felt the training sessions should be large, open sessions in the Lecture Hall.

The two task forces will work together to harmonize their documents.

Joan will report the CCC discussion to LMC.

● Task Force on Electronic and Print Versions Cataloging. Matthew Beacom, Chair.

This task force focused on cataloging practice when the library receives both the tangible and online versions of the same resource. The general practice has been to create separate records, although we have accepted the one record approach in cases when a vendor supplies one record for both print and online versions.

CCC discussed the placement of URLs in either the bibliographic record or the MFHD. A case was made for putting the URL in the MFHD for local material, as this location would make record maintenance easier.

There was also discussion about specifically including Rare Book/Special Collections records in recommendation 2. Matthew noted that we currently have separate records for around 300,000 items from various projects. We might be digitizing local objects, while a vendor might also be digitizing the same objects. Some of the commercial surrogates are our own, and there is increasing overlap.

The Task Force will take a close look at URL placement, and also include Rare Book/Special Collection material in Recommendation 2. The TF will revise their document and bring it back to CCC.

Genre/Form Authority Records

LC has already begun tagging 155 fields for Genre/Form terms. Our local authority tag table needs to be updated. LCDB is not yet including these records.

We will only receive these records through MARS if the subject heading matches exactly, without subdivisions.

We do not yet know how these genre/form headings will display in the OPAC.

CPDC recommends applying the genre/form headings for original cataloging only. It is not necessary to add to member copy, although the Film Studies Library might adopt this option. CPDC recommends that catalog librarians have the option to add more specific form/genre terms (as instructed by H1913), according to the cataloger’s judgment.

We do not need to edit the genre/form headings in member records, and we do not need to add these terms to member records.

1