<html>
<body>
<font size=3>fellow catalogers-- please excuse me if you've already seen
this, but i thought it might be of interest to those who may not yet have
done so. food for a future YUL discussion... <br>
(BTW, bending to the uproar, LC has delayed implementation for a month,
until June)<br>
thanks, ej. <br><br>
<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">
Date: Wed, 10 May 2006
14:36:47 -0500<br>
Reply-To: wagstaff@UIUC.EDU<br>
Sender: Library Faculty <LIBFAC-L@LISTSERV.UIUC.EDU><br>
From: John Wagstaff <wagstaff@UIUC.EDU><br>
Subject: [LIBFAC-L] The music library community's response to LC's
proposal to change its treatment of series headings<br>
Comments: cc: Andy Bendel <abendel@uiuc.edu>, Bill Buss
<wmbuss@uiuc.edu>,<br>
Jane Menkhaus
<menkhaus@uiuc.edu>,<br>
Richard Burbank
<burbank@uiuc.edu>, Robin Hess <rahess@uiuc.edu><br>
To: LIBFAC-L@LISTSERV.UIUC.EDU<br><br>
<br>
Dear colleagues:<br>
I'm giving below the text that has been sent to LC on behalf <br>
of the Music Library Association by that Association's <br>
Bibliographic Control Subcommittee. While some of the <br>
examples given are very specific to music, other arguments <br>
have wider applicability.<br><br>
I'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. The MLA <br>
text follows. The text of LC's original announcement is at <br><br>
<a href="http://www.loc.gov/catdir/delay.html" eudora="autourl">
http://www.loc.gov/catdir/delay.html</a><br><br>
<br>
John Wagstaff<br><br>
To: Beacher J. Wiggins<br>
Director for
Acquisitions and Bibliographic Access<br>
Library of
Congress<br><br>
From: The Bibliographic Control Committee, Music Library <br>
Association<br><br>
cc: Barbara Tillett<br>
Chief, Cataloging Policy
and Support Office<br>
Library of
Congress<br><br>
Susan H. Vita<br>
Chief, Special Materials
Cataloging Division (SMCD)<br>
Library of
Congress<br><br>
<br>
Date: May 3, 2006<br><br>
Subject: The Library of Congress decision to cease providing <br>
controlled series access in bibliographic records<br><br>
<br>
The Music Library Association has serious concerns about <br>
several aspects of LC.s recently announced decision to cease <br>
creating series authority records. This decision will have a <br>
detrimental impact on the music cataloging community.<br><br>
First, we find the manner and timing of the announcement <br>
troubling. With other recent decisions affecting cataloging <br>
records, the Library of Congress has issued a proposed <br>
change, allowed a period for comment from affected <br>
constituencies, and then implemented the changes, <br>
with the potential for modification based on the various <br>
responses. Most recently, this happened with the LCRIs for <br>
22.17 and 25.13 and is currently in process for the LCRI to <br>
22.1B. However, in this case, which affects cataloging <br>
records in a much more substantive fashion, LC provided no <br>
opportunity for comment, instead giving only ten days notice <br>
before implementation. The flurry of correspondence on <br>
various e-mail discussion lists, including AUTOCAT, PCCLIST, <br>
NMP-L and OCLC-CAT, indicate that many catalogers have strong <br>
objections to this change in policy and to the precipitous <br>
announcement. At the very least, we request a delay in the <br>
implementation of this decision in order to fully consider <br>
alternatives that might better meet the competing needs of <br>
the shared cataloging community and cost-cutting at LC.<br><br>
Our second concern centers on the overall impact of this <br>
decision and the underlying assumptions about ceasing to <br>
provide controlled access to series. While indexing and <br>
keyword access have improved over the past decade, these <br>
features cannot substitute for the identification and <br>
collocation provided by the creation and application of <br>
series authority records. Keyword searching provides minimal <br>
context for the results of a series search, and many searches <br>
would likely return a large, unsorted retrieval set. Options <br>
for complex search strategies, using Boolean operators or <br>
other qualifiers, are often limited in bibliographic <br>
utilities and local systems. Such search strategies also <br>
require sophisticated users.<br><br>
Once LC implements this decision, music catalogers and <br>
catalog users will have difficulty identifying different sets <br>
of complete works for prolific composers. For example, the <br>
NAF contains seven different series authority records for <br>
Beethoven's complete works, nine for Chopin's, four for <br>
Mozart's and four for J.S. Bach's. These series titles use <br>
common words such as Complete works, Complete edition, Werke, <br>
Gesamtausgabe, Ausgabe, etc. Many libraries have more than <br>
one set of complete works for these composers. Without <br>
authoritative series tracings, the differences cannot be <br>
easily distinguished. In this case, the cost of eliminating <br>
SARs will fall on catalog users, who will not be able to rely <br>
on straightforward searches to identify such series. It is <br>
much easier to teach a library user to search in specific <br>
ways rather than for all possible variables.<br><br>
The April 20, 2006 announcement states that LC recognizes <br>
that there will be "some adverse impacts, but they are <br>
mitigated when the gains in processing time are considered.." <br>
Only the Library of Congress will recognize these gains. <br>
Every other library that opts to continue providing <br>
authoritative series access will have to create and maintain <br>
its own SARs, a significant expenditure of time and effort <br>
for each affected institution. Perhaps more importantly, the <br>
Library of Congress' decision to undo existing traced series <br>
on copy cataloging goes against the spirit of shared <br>
cataloging. Indeed, once LC applies this decision to copy <br>
cataloging records, the record redistributed to the <br>
bibliographic utilities may be inferior to the original.<br><br>
Most libraries have followed series tracing practices <br>
established in the SARs, including decisions to class <br>
particular numbered series together. With this announcement <br>
stating that LC will no longer follow pre-existing <br>
SARs, many libraries are struggling to decide how closely to <br>
follow this new policy. If a library opts to treat certain <br>
series as exceptions to this new "never trace series" <br>
practice, each decision will have to be documented <br>
locally, and all cataloging staff trained to look for and <br>
apply the local exceptions. These complications will slow <br>
down productivity at all affected libraries, since LC copy <br>
could no longer be accepted completely, and local authority <br>
work would become much more complicated.<br><br>
With this decision, additional questions arise about LC's <br>
ongoing leadership in providing quality cataloging and their <br>
participation in the Program for Cooperative Cataloging. <br>
However, a different approach to the problem would help on <br>
both counts.<br><br>
Because creating series authority records has been identified <br>
as creating a negative impact on the Library of Congress, we <br>
recommend that LC expand training and give more libraries <br>
clearance to create series authorities. With a short-term <br>
investment in providing series authority reviewers and <br>
trainers, LC would create a positive impact for the entire <br>
cataloging community. Current PCC participants are already <br>
creating more authority records than the Library of Congress <br>
annually. Once additional catalogers complete SAR training, <br>
LC's burden will lessen while the increased numbers of SARs <br>
will enrich the national online series authority file for the <br>
good of all users.<br><br>
Thus, for all of the above reasons, we strongly recommend <br>
that the Library of Congress reconsider the decision to cease <br>
providing controlled series access in bibliographic records. <br>
The impact of this policy on the Library of Congress may be <br>
minimal, but the impact on the music cataloging community, <br>
along with the rest of the shared cataloging community, is <br>
vast.<br><br>
<br>
Nancy Lorimer<br>
Chair, Bibliographic Control Committee<br>
Music Library Association<br><br>
John Wagstaff<br>
Head of Music Library and Associate Professor of Library
Administration<br>
Room 2146C Music Building<br>
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign<br>
Urbana<br>
IL61801<br>
Tel. 217-244-4070<br>
e-mail wagstaff@uiuc.edu</font></blockquote></body>
<br>
</html>