You still get a browse option if you click on a series, which I'm sure some
people will do, so you still need authority records to keep things like series
together for secondary browsing.
By secondary browsing, I mean clicking on a heading from a record you're already
in to find items in the same series, of the same subject, in the same
classification area, same author etc. I'm not sure it is a proper term, but for
want of a better one I think I might start using in defense of authorities,
since even if the browse as a primary finding method is no longer popular, I
should think it is very much so for this sort of secondary search.
I still think the obligation to use both 490 and 830 if the authority matches
the original form is somewhat counter-productive, however - fundamentalism is no
reason for cluttering up records with duplicate information... But maybe that's
just me....
Martin Kelleher
Electronic Resources/Bibliographic Services Librarian
University of Liverpool
-----Original Message-----
From: Bibliographic standards in UK libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Rose-Ann Movsovic
Sent: 23 January 2009 11:09
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: British Library Policy on recording series information in
bibliographic records
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
|