23 June 2005
Dear Everybody,
I'm Chief of the Reference & Government Documents
Divisions here at The City College of New York,
so I have a foot on the public service side of
things ... but I also do all my own cataloguing
for these two divisions, so I have a foot on the
cataloguing/technical service side as well.
I've started to include Table of Contents entries
for titles that come across my desk. (If there are
any cataloguers out there, it's the 505 field of
a MARC record).
I also add lots of public notes (z fields) if, for
example there is an alternate title.
I also create separate holding/item records for
each format. Some of our serial titles have been
published at one time or another in microfiche,
print and electronic versions and that all goes
on one record.
Old time catalogue rules said you should create
a separate catalogue record for each format ...
but my public service experience tells me that
patrons don't keep on searching for another
possible record, once they've found a record
for the title they want.
Patrons need to know up front what issues, etc.
of a title you own in whatever format... I call
it my "one-stop shopping" theory of cataloguing.
Unless I'm writing a mystery, I don't believe in
making my patrons hunt for clues.
If your patrons can't easily locate a title in
your catalogue, then, for all intents and purposes,
you don't own it ... even if there are 15 copies
on the shelf :>)
More and more library patrons are using our facilities
.. without using "us" ... think about
online databases full of journal articles, or even
the catalogue itself. When a patron has a problem
in the library, they can always come to the
reference desk and ask for help.
But all these electronic resources encourage
patrons to use our resources sitting at home in
their bunny slippers. Why should a remote patron
get less basic information that I would give
them face-to-face?
I catalogue for the patron in bunny slippers.
Kind regards,
Grace-Ellen
Grace-Ellen McCrann
Chief, Reference & Government Documents Divisions
The City College of New York
Cohen Library, 2nd Floor
138th Street & Convent Avenue
New York, NY 10031
(212) 650 5073
gemscot@yahoo.com
------------
Hi folks,
<snip>
He articulates many fascinating and provocative
thoughts, one of which is the notion that for
certain kinds of items, contextual description is
sometimes (often?) more important than physical
description. (He bases this belief in part on how
Google has changed user expectations of the
search/find experience.)
In thinking in practical terms of how this could be
implemented, that would suggest that a bibliographic
record should include more than just physical
description. Just like the record for an archival
collection typically includes a biography or history,
and discussion of provenance, or just like
a dealer's catalog entry might have ample
contextual description, Tennant's viewpoint suggest
that we should be doing this for most individual
volumes or items that come our way.
How do you all feel about this?
Bob Kosovsky, Ph.D., Curator, Rare Books and
Manuscripts
Music Division -- The New York Public Library for
the Performing Arts
Listowner: OPERA-L ; SMT-TALK ; SMT-ANNOUNCE ;
SoundForge-users
My opinions do not necessarily represent those of
my institutions.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com