-------- Original Message --------

Subject:	Fwd: FAST (faceted) headings in bib. records -- how are others handling these?
Date:	Wed, 29 Jan 2014 20:52:40 -0500 (EST)
From:	Paige G. Andrew <[log in to unmask]>
To:	Air Photo Maps, GIS Forum - Map Librarianship <[log in to unmask]>

Â

This message  was originally submitted  by [log in to unmask]  to the MAPS-L  list at

LISTSERV.UGA.EDU.  If you  simply forward  it back  to the  list, using  a mail

command that generates "Resent-" fields (ask your local user support or consult

the documentation of your mail program if in doubt), it will be distributed and

the explanations you  are now reading will be removed  automatically. If on the

other hand you edit the contributions you  receive into a digest, you will have

to remove this  paragraph manually. Finally, you should be  able to contact the

author  of this  message by  using  the normal  "reply" function  of your  mail

program.

 

----------------- Message requiring your approval (32 lines) ------------------

Hi fellow catalogers!

 

I am forwarding a note from one of my Team members regarding seeing OCLC-added FAST (faceted subject headings) showing up in bibliographic records for cartographic resources more frequently. When I attended ALA Midwinter Meeting this past weekend this topic did not come up in any formal or informal map cataloging discusssions. It is quite likely that it was discussed in one or more other cataloging-related programs sponsored by ALCTS CAMMS or the Library of Congress or OCLC or whatever -- unfortunately my current bevy of duties and responsibilities with MAGIRT prevents me from getting to cataloging-related programming.

 

We would appreciate hearing from other catalogers who also are seeing these headings about policy decisions and practices being implemented in relation to them. On Penn State's end, a policy decision was made last Fall to strip them out of the bib. record once the record was downloaded into our local system because we have no use for them (for now) and they are duplicative in nature as you can see by the example provided below.

 

Looking forward to replies!

 

Paige

 

----- Forwarded Message -----

 

We've been seeing an increasing number of records with subject terms (indicator 7) derived from the FAST thesaurus; I've read the write-ups of the FAST program, and OCLC seems committed to it. Is this something we need to have a local policy on? Paige, is there a national perspective on FAST for cartographic materials?

 

It probably isn't worth the effort to delete them, but they are rather repetitive. For example, here's a record with

 

650 0 Roads Ç‚z Pennsylvania Ç‚z Jefferson County Ç‚v Maps.

650 0 Public lands Ç‚z Pennsylvania Ç‚z Jefferson County Ç‚v Maps.

650 7 Public lands. Ç‚2 fast Ç‚0 (OCoLC)fst01082573

650 7 Roads. Ç‚2 fast Ç‚0 (OCoLC)fst01098511

 

It's tough to see the FAST headings as useful in this case, and most others involving cartographic material.

 

I gather this is happening on other formats, not just cartographic records?

 

For comprehensive insights, here's the FAST study:

 

http://oclc.org/content/dam/research/publications/library/2013/2013-04.pdf

 

 

 

 

Â