Chris, They did. But I did not want to delve into details about the different OCLC and PCC programs and what an individual cataloger can/cannot do to a master record based upon them without finding enough time to adequately share info about each. In Rick's case, he did not explicitly mention whether he is using RDA as his record-creating standard and so of course if that is not the case he would be less familiar with the range of things to be changed/added to either an earlier AACR2-based record (or older) or even a hybrid record. I plan on contacting him directly if he needs that kind of assistance (and may not even want to go there). Keep in mind that there's a wide range of what catalogers are allowed to do with master records, in my case since we are one of the few institutions with National Enhance status under the BIBCO program we have more latitude in making changes, while others may only be interested in doing corrections based on OCLC's "database enrichment" program (and even there one must be doing full-level cataloging) or simply reporting errors. While I'm on the particular page, I'll share OCLC's quality assurance information link as a means to at least point Rick in the direction of some of the things that can be done in this area from OCLC: http://www.oclc.org/bibformats/en/quality.html I don't have time right now for anything more. Paige From: "Chris Winters" <[log in to unmask]> To: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 11:16:09 AM Subject: Re: Thanks and another question Hi, I thought OCLC had invited catalogers to convert older records to RDA? It's certainly helped the process along by adding 336, 337, and 338 fields and changing "col." to "color" and "cm." to "cm" in 300s, for example. When I've had to make major changes in a record (for example by fixing typos and/or adding call numbers, subject headings, and statements of responsibility), I've sometimes been guilty of "RDAizing" the whole thing and replacing the record. I'll admit that I always feel a bit guilty about this, but, when I've e-mailed OCLC to ask if this is really ok, they've said yes. Something that has made me _really_ feel guilty has been when I've changed a clearly incorrect call number. This hasn't happened often, but it has. Underlying this has been a certain level of distaste for hybrid records. OCLC has undermined the consistency and integrity of records compiled under older cataloging rules by doing partial "RDAization." Paige may well be right to imply that this sort of thing is a bad idea. I'd be grateful for others' thoughts. Chris Winters University of Chicago Library ________________________________________ From: Maps-L: Map Librarians, etc. [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Paige G. Andrew [[log in to unmask]] Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 8:46 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: Thanks and another quesiton Rick, A quick reply here and then I will try and find time to share more later. The key aspect to working with/potentially changing any master record in OCLC is the mantra "do no harm!" That means unless there are actual errors in the record or missing information needing to be added, particularly when it comes to access points, we should never second-guess the original cataloger. Another important factor is to know under which cataloging rules the record was created because what might appear to be "wrong" in a given case may be perfectly fine under an older set of rules like AACR2 (the code found in the "Desc" fixed field is the guide here). You bring up several other aspects related to what and who can change master records in OCLC that I don't have time to touch at the moment. That's where I can share more information later on. As for your workflow process of downloading copy from OCLC and making changes to a record within Workflows in Sirsi (we are a Sirsi unit as well) that is probably the best method for you to be using given the lack of understanding of OCLC master records. Within your own local system you are free to do whatever you want or need to do with a given record. If at some point you gain a better understanding of the master record mechanism in OCLC I would recommend doing changes in OCLC so that others benefit from your work as well as yourself, but don't go there until you are confident about the "do's and don'ts" of making changes to those master records. Paige ________________________________ From: "Rick Grapes" <[log in to unmask]> To: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 1:19:08 PM Subject: Thanks and another quesiton Hi all, I would like to express my thanks for all the input sent my way about the lat/long question and my one map with 2 scales front and back situation. I now know what “|2bounding” means. Years ago when I was in library school and working as a student in the map collection, I used to calculate the lat/long for map after map after map, using a meter stick and calculator. Went thru lots of gray matter and batteries. I hated it. Once I became maps cataloger, I avoided calculating lat/long whenever I had the slightest excuse. Now with the bounding site, the trauma of my youth is eliminated. Yeah! One of the responses mentioned briefly we should avoid cluttering up of OCLC. This brought to my mind another question regarding the impact of cataloging work on OCLC. First off, let me say that I have a general/limited understanding of OCLC’s master and institutional record setup. I regularly import from OCLC and then do all my work locally in Sirsi. I’ve tried cataloging directly in OCLC, but my senior moments cause lots of mistakes. “Old dog new tricks …” Thus I’ve returned to what I know best. But I’m unclear on what impact my work, importing, changing, and exporting, might be having on OCLC. Will the record be automatically linked to the master record, no matter what I do? Is it possible to upgrade an existing institution or master record, inserting improvements, without permission of the originating institution? What fields do I need to keep or leave unchanged so that I’m assured the record will be linked to the existing master? And the opposite is true. When should I avoid linking to the master? I’m just concerned that a record might be inadvertently overlaid, or a dissimilar record might be linked to a master incorrectly. I’m probably straining at knates here. I’m also exposing my ignorance. Please be gentile. ☺ Thanks for your help. Again! Rick Grapes BYU Map Collection