Catalogers Group

March 15, 20012:30-3:30

West Electronic (Media) Classroom

Minutes

Meeting convened at 2:30 PM.

  1. The Cataloging Department Reference collection (Rita Stumps)

    2. Rita reported on plans to improve the collection. The purpose of the weeding is to update older tools, get rid of outdated tools, and make room for new tools coming in including discards from the YRL Reference Department. The dictionaries have not been weeded yet, but through the process of ordering new ones, they will be. Requests for new dictionaries (or newer editions of existing ones) go to Caroline as well as requests to hang onto older but still valuable dictionaries. Caroline requested that catalogers bring her OCLC printouts of any titles thought necessary for the Department’s collection. New dictionaries coming into the Department whether by purchase or from YRL Reference fallout need to be treated as replacements because the old ones have been cataloged and are online. The ORION2 records need to be updated/deleted to reflect what we have.

    Silvia and Paul of the Authority Section alerted Rita to this web site (called "Terminology Collection: Online Dictionaries") http://www.uwasa.fi/comm/termino/collect/ Louise Ratliff will add this site to the Cataloging Department webpage.

    The rest of the CatDept reference collection will undergo a weeding project. Rita will place orange tags in those titles considered candidates for weeding. She will compile and maintain an MSWord document to keep track of volumes nominated for weeding. The document will be sent to the

    Department. Once the two-week review period has passed, she will send an amended list to the Department and people will then have an opportunity to claim volumes for individual use. The

    remainders from that weeding will go to Leon Ferder, who will decide if the Library needs those titles; leftovers after that process will go to Gifts. Mini Team reference collections will not be part of this weeding process. Rita is looking for volunteers for this project.

    John added that outdated computer tools that have no software or hardware support would automatically be weeded.

     

  2. CD-ROM cataloging document (Rita)

    3. Rita distributed and reported on the recent CD-ROM document that was also distributed electronically to everyone in the Department. She wanted everyone to notice that the first page is a handy quick reference. When the document is read online, we can click on the hotlinks for detailed explanations. Rita encouraged everyone to read the OCLC documentation, especially the sections regarding the 006 and 008 fields.

    Luiz pointed out that CD-ROM is not to be used as an input stamp in the 049 in OCLC for a single computer file record. It is to be used as a prefix only when CD-ROM is the accompanying material or accompanied by materials of different formats.

     

  3. TPAC Update – Informal notes (Angela Riggio)

TPAC meets every Thursday. Most recent discussions have been centered on Classic.

Feb.15—prioritized our TPAC "to-do" list

Highlights:

1. Classic report class/Subject codes

a. documentation

b. definition and implementation

2. Classic sessions for selectors—Monday, April 9 10-12 West Classroom; Tuesday, April 10 2-4 SEL Learning Center—emphasis on searching from the public service/collection development perspective. No formal sign-up required.

3. Net Library Procedures—from acquisitions point of view

4. TAOS Serials module-on hold, will prioritize according to needs of SIPTG

5. SRLF processing in Cat Client (upcoming meeting with YRL serials should clear up problems-will be able to revise and bring finality to the SRLF deposit procedures document, which will be updated by the Documentation Committee and mounted on the Cataloging Client Policy and Procedures web page.

6. Classic supplier file clean-up

"lower" priority items include:

1. Web2 for Classic (need to do an exact left-to-right search in order to achieve accurate results—still an issue for DRA to address)

2. Proposed Web access for OLGA, LARS, and private Acquisitions databases

3. TAOS reports-have discussed our "wish lists" of TAOS reports; Lola Willoughby asked us to name TPAC’s top five lists for testing the SAFARI report writing software.

top vote getters so far:

a. Bib. records with 999 field = $a LARGE

b. Serial records that lack 86X fields (migration problems)

c. Holdings records with more than 75 items, so they can be split d. Ghost holdings records, by branch, with 866 field

Other items being discussed:

1. New version of Classic to be installed in late April, if there are no objections from Acquisitions units and nothing goes wrong-Andy K. is working on beefing up the operating system in the meantime.

2. DRA representative is coming to UCLA in April to observe Acquisitions Processes—our chance to offer suggestions/input for the DRA Acquisitions module.

Cataloging Client Documentation Committee:
Will issue the update of "Format of 86X $a Monograph Holdings" document soon, and slight adjustments to "labels for serials" and "labels for monographs" documents; at which time we’ll ask John to put on Catalogers Group agenda. This will alter the way we enter holdings into both OCLC 049 $v as well as TAOS.

CAT CLIENT POLICIES AND PROCEDURES page now on the Staff Intranet: http://staff.library.ucla.edu/

We are working to revise completely the way the page looks. The Documentation Committee offers thanks to everyone who gave comments and constructive criticism.

 

 

  1. UCLA document on translation cutters (John Riemer)

    2. Everyone received a copy of the Department translations cutters table prepared by Gia in 1995. As original catalogers still find it a useful expansion of LC’s own tables, Louise will move it into a more prominent (i.e. find-able) place on our website.

     

     

  2. Theses/Dissertations (John)

John had several good questions to ask the group about possible improvement of theses and dissertation cataloging workflow.

  1. Should they be bound prior to cataloging?

    2. There was interest but also concern expressed about the need to remark when cuttering and/or form of main entry mistakes are made. Catalogers traditionally ensured that the thesis was complete; the assumption is that that is a proper bindery function.

  2. Should Library Assistants perform description and Original Catalogers perform the subject analysis?

Discussion centered on whether enough time was saved to warrant multiple handling of one item. Last year the Department experimented with an LA inputting the descriptive content. Silvia reminded the group that when only one LA had the entire description-inputting task it was unpleasant and unrewarding, so the work would need to be distributed among the LAs. Several catalogers would like to try splitting the work again; others found performing the whole function themselves to be easy, thanks to Constant Data, as well as challenging and rewarding. Louise offered to help anyone interested to install a Cutter Sanborn macro.

VI Other

John asked if anyone used 780-785 fields in monographic records. Answer was no except for monographic databases adjoining serials that change titles. The suggestion was made to ask SEL to see if those fields are used in a succession of technical reports.

John also reported that the two new OCLC sessions will be available beginning March 29th and BTW, they cost $162.00 a month, each.

April Catalogers Group meetings: April 19 in the West Media Classroom from 2:30-3:30 and April 26 in the Cataloging Department conference room. FYI, the LAUC Spring Assembly is April 19th from 1:30-2:30, so please allow for time to get from Faculty Center to YRL.

Meeting adjourned at 3:33 PM.

 

Compiled by: Nancy Norris