-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: oclc records
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 11:26:00 -0500
From: Paige Andrew <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
References:
<[log in to unmask]>
Alice,
As a long-time maps cataloger I hear and understand your frustration and
of course see the very point of your own staff having to spend (dare I
say "waste") their time making such edits to individual records that the
creator of the record should not have made to begin with. This is the
bane of cataloging -- some individuals are better trained and more
thorough in their work and with the various cataloging rules, rule
interpretations, standards, etc. than others, (and yes, it's obvious
that some just don't care and/or are forced to accept "quantity of work"
over quality). And, the blame does not lie with OCLC in particular;
WorldCat is a shared database of records that are contributed by its
members, so ultimately the blame for sloppy/inadequate/poor individual
bibliographic records of any kind lies with the person(s) creating those
records. If each record created were always double-checked for not only
its accuracy concerning the MARC and ISBD standards we are all supposed
to be following, but just as importantly for such things as spelling a
word correctly, correct capitalization, and the numerous other "little
things" before the record is added to WorldCat, then the next
cataloger/institution to use that record and beyond would have little or
no work to do. Sad to say, that is not true in the real world.
I will say though, that in my own personal observation the quality of
map records has improved in the past 10-15 years overall, and I believe
that improvement stems from more individuals getting the kind of
training needed as institutions turn to getting their individual map
backlogs cataloged. In my experience, the OCLC regional offices have
stepped up and worked to offer map cataloging workshops consistently
during this time, and in addition individual institutions have stepped
up and asked experienced map catalogers like myself, Susan Moore, Mary
Larsgaard, and others to come to their place and work with their staff
directly. Add to that the existence of /Cartographic Materials: A Manual
of Interpretation for AACR2/ that takes the succinct AACR2R rules and
puts them into the "real world" context so that those less-experienced
at describing maps has a better understanding, and thus a better chance
of creating an accurate description. Plus, with MAPS-L and other online
communication tools, it is easier than ever for someone who has never
cataloged a map, or who does so once-in-awhile, to get advice and
guidance from those of us who are experienced. All it takes is for the
individual or his/her supervisor to reach out and there is help available.
Still, the specific examples that Alice shares is less related to
overall training in map cataloging practices with existing standards and
more related to just plain sloppiness and lack of attention to details.
And that boils down to the individual cataloger improving his/her own
practice, perhaps with a better review process in place either by
themselves or through a second set of eyes. And let me note also that
perhaps some of what Alice may be seeing is related to the many bib.
records in WorldCat created under old or older cataloging standards in
which a record created under something like the original AACR will look
radically different in many ways, including punctuation, than those
created under the revised AACR2 standards of this decade. Some of these
types of records are slowly being improved through the efforts of a
small number of individuals participating in OCLC's Enhance Program or
the PCC's BIBCO program or both, but given the vast number of these
records in existence vs. the small number of people dedicated to these
quality-control programs, things will not be changing quickly.
Finally, as a matter of authority control, let me touch on Alice's
mention of the map producing company known generically as ADC (that's
what we initially see by eye on the maps and atlases that they create).
If one looks up in the Library of Congress Authority File this company
name one finds that the authorized heading to be used in bib. records is
"Alexandria Drafting Company" for any of their works published up to
1983, after that the authorized heading is "ADC (Firm)" due to the
company formally changing its name to "ADC" (note the 510 field in the
authority record, and the 670 note of explanation). There's no excuse
for someone to put in, in lower-case letters "Adc", this goes back to
sloppy work. Naturally, there are some who do not have access to LCAF
for a variety of reasons, and some others who perhaps chose not to
"worry about" authority control; if that be the case then may I ask that
under either of these circumstances bibliographic records being created
please be done as minimal-level records (letter code "k" in the Encoding
Level fixed field in the workform) so that other catalogers who come
across these records can upgrade them with correct/accurate information
even without being Enhance participants.
Alice, you are not being too picky in my opinion. But, I wouldn't expect
major changes to what you are seeing either, unless individual
catalogers are willing to make improvements to the way that they do
their work. That said, the majority of us do the best that we can.
Sincerely,
Paige
At 07:52 PM 1/9/2009, Angie Cope wrote:
> ----- Forwarded Message -----
> From: [log in to unmask]
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Friday, January 9, 2009 6:32:05 PM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central
> Subject: oclc records
>
>
> Is it me? Am I too picky? Is OCLC outsourcing its cataloging to the moon?
>
>
> Why do I find the following in professional ??? cataloging records?
>
>
> Washington Dc-- I suppose on the moon they do not know how to
> capitalize/spell DC
>
> Adc the map people, instead of ADC and no mention in the record of
> Alexandria Drafting Company
>
> Harpercollins and not HarperCollins
>
> etc., etc.,
>
> I am not a cataloger, so I probably just do not understand something here.
> This just means our staff has to make the corrections so the records are
> literate. Not to mention the staffs of every other library using these
> records. sorry, grrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.
>
>
> Alice C. Hudson
> Chief, The Lionel Pincus & Princess Firyal Map Division
> The Humanities and Social Sciences Library
> The New York Public Library
> 5th Avenue & 42nd Street, Room 117
> New York, NY 10018-2788
>
> [log in to unmask], 212-930-0589, fax 212-930-0027
>
> Hours: 1-7:30 Tu & Wed, 1-6 Thurs-Sat. Closed Sun, Mon.
>
> http://nypl.org/research/chss/map/map.html
|
