CCC Home Page

Cataloging Coordinating Committee Minutes


Date: 1998-02-05

Attendance not recorded


Agenda topics included:

1. 2nd discussion of the Report of the Local Headings Task Group
2. update and discussion of the 940 program
3. discussion of draft Orbis Cataloging Manual chapter on preliminary
bibliographic records
4. discussion of cataloging workflows in Yale libraries
5. discussion regarding the addition of 2 persons as members of CCC as a
professional development opportunity


1. 2nd discussion of the Report of the Local Headings Task Group

Deborah Leslie and Joan Swanekamp lead a long discussion of the report.
Discussion centered upon reports from CCC members of the responses from
public services staff. Beinecke staff will be submitted a written response,
but Steven Young gave CCC a preview (mostly of the reaction to the
provenance tracing suggestions:

--Curators are not sure of the systems implications of some of the choices
presented in the report and may ask for some amplifications.

--Curators strongly feel the value of their investment (broadly meant) in
present practices.

--Curators prefer that no change be made.

--Curators find the first choices generally unacceptable.

--Curators if pressed would be able to change to using 69x fields.

--Curators find the creation of split files, the changes in the index
displays, and changes in searching strategies to be highly undesirable.

Music staff feels pretty much the way Beinecke staff does.

Many curators have not had an opportunity to respond to the document. Those
who have (Simon Samoeil, Cesar Rodriguez) find the change of the area
tracing from the 630: 4: to 69x acceptable. But they also prefer that files
not be split so look toward a global change to unify past with future
practices.

SSLIS would like changes to the area tracings kept simple.

CCC discussed the use of 655 field for form/genre headings at length.
Audrey Novak detailed the rather simple process for making changes in the
OPAC displays. Requests for change need to go to libtech where RSC and CCC
have representives who can arrange the necessary consultation with staff.
The database administration unit will make the changes when Libtech gives
the OK.

Action item: CCC folk will follow up with curators by the next CCC meeting.
Joan will talk with Elisabeth Fairman at British Art Center. And CCC's
awaits the Beinecke written response. More discussion at our next meeting.

2. The 940 program

Problem for libraries using status "a" for "semi-permanent" provisional
records.

Audrey Novak reported on the 940 program. It is not creating 940 codes for
records that are coded with cataloging status "a" in the holdings record.
This presents a problem for libraries that have some "semi-permanent"
provisional records coded with "a". Suggested solution: use status "g", but
there may be consequences for planned batch matching of records. For
records with encoding level 7 and status g will not be part of batch
matching searches.

Action: Joan will look into the batch matching issues.

Problem with inputting 940 in bibliographic record.

Xin Li requested clarification on policy regarding inputting 940 fields in
bibliographic records. She would prefer to have acquisitions dept. staff
stop inputting 940 and allow the 940 program to create the 940.

Action: Joan will speak with Vicki and Sue C-P of CCL about beginning this
practice.

3. discussion of draft Orbis Cataloging Manual chapter on preliminary
bibliographic records

Brief introduction of the draft to CCC by Joan Swanekamp. This is a
follow-up on the practice of using encoding level 5 instead of 7 (or
whatever) for provisional records.

Action: CCC folk need to read draft for next meeting, show the draft to
staff directing units that do their own acquisitions work, and send Joan
examples of their practice. Will discuss this next time.

4. discussion of cataloging workflows in Yale libraries

Discussion postponed to next meeting. This item will be at the top of the
next agenda to allow time for discussion.

5. discussion regarding the addition of 2 persons as members of CCC as a
professional development opportunity

Brief discussion led to favorable decision. Call for volunters will be
limited to technical services staff. Some discussion of offering a
liasonship to an RSC or other public services librarian.

(Will the volunteers be M&P only? Librarians only?--Perhaps, that was the
assumption of many. This is an outgrowth of SCOPA.)

Action: Joan will send message to yulcat-l asking for volunteers from
technical services staff. She will select 2 who will serve for terms of 1
or 2 years.

Next meeting in two weeks: Thursday 19 Feb. at 2 pm.

Notes submitted by Matthew Beacom

 


Site URL: http://www.library.yale.edu/cataloging/ccc/ccchome.htm
Comments to: Joan Swanekamp  <joan.swanekamp@yale.edu>

© 2003 Yale University Library

Top of Page