-------- 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