Page Comparison

...

Enter new notes at the top of this page.

...

12-18-18 (DRAFT)

QUESTION

• Do WEMI-to-WEMI relationship designators require qualifiers in all cases?
  • No, we're to use the relationship designator as it appears in RDA Appendix J. For example:
    • 775 08 $i Translation of: $a ...
    • 700 1_ $i Abridged as (work): $a ...

REVISED EDITIONS OF MONOGRAPHS

• Reviewed from LC with some additions by Joshua

OCLC RECORD MANAGER

• Posited as the successor to Connexion, but with no end-of-life date yet scheduled for Connexion
• Watched this video previewing the tool

ANNOUNCEMENTS

• Heads up regarding LC services affected by government shutdowns in past (though LC ended up not being affected in this shutdown)
• PCC ISBD decisions
  • See announcement from PCC (below)
  • In Spring 2019, MSUL must decide:
    • How or if we want to implement any of the available options re: ISBD punctuation
    • What to do (if anything) about copy that implements options 2 or 3

PCC colleagues, At its recent meeting, the PCC Policy Committee reaffirmed its decision to allow bibliographic records with limited ISBD punctuation to be treated as full-level PCC copy. This decision comes after reviewing feedback from test participants who evaluated three test sets of records provided by Library of Congress, the National Library of Medicine, and OCLC. For more information about the test, please read the message below or click here.

Beginning in spring 2019, PCC libraries will have three options to handle ISBD punctuation when authenticating new records:

1. Continue current practice

2. Omit terminal period in any field*; code Leader/18 (Descriptive cataloging form) “i”

3. Omit ISBD punctuation between subfields of descriptive fields and omit terminal period in any field*; code Leader/18 (Descriptive cataloging form) “c”

* Exception: Terminal periods integral to the data (e.g., recorded as part of abbreviations, initials, etc.) should not be omitted.

Options 2 and 3 are optional, not mandatory. However, creating records with limited punctuation is expected to save time for catalogers, simplify training of new catalogers, make it easier to map data to and from other formats, and allow for an easier transition to linked data or vice versa (e.g., mapping BIBFRAME to MARC).

To facilitate the implementation, PCC will:

1. Develop and maintain style guidelines for records with limited punctuation;

2. Provide adequate training resources for catalogers and revise PCC documentation to update policies and include examples with limited punctuation;

3. Request that LC Network Development and MARC Standards Office and bibliographic utilities revise MARC 21 documentation to include examples with limited punctuation;

4. Work with bibliographic utilities and other interested parties to develop tools and specifications to automate the process of removal or reinsertion of punctuation;

5. Encourage vendors, bibliographic utilities, etc., to explore functionality to index and display records with limited punctuation as defined by the PCC;

6. Encourage vendors, bibliographic utilities, etc., to explore functionality to allow their users to easily add or remove punctuation as needed.

The Policy Committee is in the process of developing a detailed implementation plan which will include the aforementioned style guidelines. I will share more information with you as it becomes available. In the meantime, if you have questions, suggestions, or comments, please feel free to contact me.

Sincerely,

Xiaoli Li

PCC Chair

Head of Content Support Services

UC Davis Library

12-04-18 (DRAFT)

CATALOGING SHOW & TELL / ANNOUNCEMENTS

...