Brenda,
Thank you for the clarification, although it doesn't address the question
of whether the BL is distinguishing between traced and untraced series,
only whether or not series authority records are being maintained. I am
therefore still having difficulty making sense of the 490 first indicator
in the light of this decision.
If neither the British Library nor the Library of Congress distinguish
between traced and untraced series I wonder why MARC21 describes the use of
the first indicator in these terms?
I would also be interested to know how the BL's system is implementing the
490 and 830. Are they treated the same for indexing or is unwarranted
prominence being given to the "generic" series (as they will be the only
ones that can be browse searched)? If all series are only keyword
searchable what is the point of ever using an 830?
On Jan 21 2009, Young, Brenda wrote:
>In response to Rose-Ann's query, I did not mean to suggest that the BL
>would not be conforming to MARC 21.
>
>In BL records first indicator zero will be used in 490 fields which do
>not have an accompnying 830 field, and first indicator one will be used
>in 490 fields which do have an accompanying 830 field.
>
>The Library of Congress stopped creating Series Authority Records in
>2006 and at that time they adopted the policy of recording series
>statements in 490 0 fields. Now that the 440 field has actually been
>made obsolete we have adopted the same policy.
>
>By 'generic series titles' we mean those which are meaningless if used
>on their own such as 'Paper', 'Occasional paper' or 'Research report'.
>These are the series titles which we will qualify in an 830.
>
>Brenda Young
>Bibliographic Systems Manager
>The British Library
>Boston Spa
>Wetherby
>West Yorkshire
>LS23 7BQ
>
>[log in to unmask]
>Tel: +44 (0)1937 546 597
>Fax: +44 (0) 1937 546 586
--
Rose-Ann Movsovic
Collections Manager
Reading University Library
|