MAPS-L Archives

Maps-L: Map Librarians, etc.

MAPS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Maps-L Moderator <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Date:
Tue, 9 Dec 2008 08:16:19 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (76 lines)
GPO is changing the way they catalog electronic items when a print also
exists. Previously the purl would be added to the print version record.
Now there will be two records for each format.  You can see part of the
discussion below from Govdoc-L and/or read about it here:

http://www.fdlp.gov/cataloging-news/newitemnumbershearings.html

This will affect map librarians so I'm forwarding this info.

Angie


-------- Original Message --------
Subject:        Re: New OCLC Records and PURLs
Date:   Mon, 8 Dec 2008 15:12:11 -0500
From:   Coleen K Parmer <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To:       Discussion of Government Document Issues
<[log in to unmask]>
To:     [log in to unmask]
References:     <[log in to unmask]>



Hello Ken,

There was a message on GovDoc_L about GPO changing the way they catalog--separate record for each format--at least for hearings.  And there is an announcement on FDLP Desktop:

http://www.fdlp.gov/cataloging-news/newitemnumbershearings.html

Cataloging News

Coleen Parmer
Chair, Collections and Technical Services
Head, Government Documents

University Libraries
Bowling Green State University
Bowling Green, Ohio  43403

[log in to unmask]
(419) 372-7826


-----Original Message-----
From: Discussion of Government Document Issues [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ken Siegert
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 11:18 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: New OCLC Records and PURLs

Does anyone know why the newest Gov Doc OCLC records are not
including the PURLs in the print-format records?  Up until about a
month ago, all of the print-format records included the PURLs (if
they were available).  Has something changed that requires that the
PURL is not included in the print-format records?  In the two cases
cited below, the online-format record was created before the print-
format record.

Here are two examples --

Interviews conducted during the course of the investigation of the
voting irregularities of August 2, 2007
print-format OCLC # 271244602
online-format OCLC # 269452820

Full committee hearing on small business exports in the current
economic climate
print-format OCLC # 269353044
online-format OCLC # 269289360

This is now causing an extra layer of work, since we now need to add
the PURL into our records.

Thanks,

Ken

ATOM RSS1 RSS2