Multiple items bound together is a problem I keep meaning to tackle. I have
a large Tracts collection which have previously been (partly) catalogued as
separate records with a 500 note "In Tracts vol 5 p 5" however they were
also (for some unknown reason) given classification numbers which are
replicated in the location field so it looks like they are in the main book
collection.. Planning to delete those numbers.
I don't know whether to continue as separate items or whether there should
be one record called "Tracts volume 1", with a 505a that lists all the
items, but then I can't include as much detail and I think it gets too large
and confusing? Some can have 20-30 smaller pamphlets inside.
It's the layers that confuse me - I make a bibliographic record but then
there is an items holding record on top - is that where the Tracts Vol 5 p6
info needs to go? (I'm in Koha LMS).
I think from a user perspective, separate records for each item will work
better but very interested to hear other people's experience.
Jennie Hillyard
@mininglibrarian
Librarian
North of England Institute of Mining and Mechanical Engineers
Neville Hall
Westgate Road
Newcastle upon Tyne
NE1 1SE
+44 (0)191 2332459
www.mininginstitute.org.uk <http://www.mininginstitute.org.uk/>
The Mining Institute is a registered charity and receives no funding from
government sources, it is entirely supported by its members. Any donations
towards the expense of maintaining the buildings and collections are
gratefully received by cheque to the address above. We are registered for
Gift Aid which means any qualifying donation is worth 25% more to us.
Would you like to receive our newsletter? Simply reply with "SUBSCRIBE" and
we will send you our quarterly update. Alternatively, if you would prefer
not to receive emails from the Mining Institute please reply with
"UNSUBSCRIBE".
From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jane
Gallagher
Sent: 15 April 2015 15:19
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Standards and provenance
Hello all,
I'm another latecomer, I'm afraid, though I have been lurking
all day and enjoying the conversations.
I'm more at the 'user' end of the spectrum in my current role at
the University of Kent's Special Collections, but I have been involved in
cataloguing in the past.
I'm interested in the use of single record for multiple items
bound together and how people generally cope with recording specific copy
information for these. So far, it sounds like it can be difficult, but you
are mostly recording all item specific information into one record.
A significant part of our collection deals with plays, produced
as separate pamphlets but later bound together, creating a mixture of
provenance information for pamphlet and bound volume. In the past, we've
experimented with creating multiple bib or holdings records linked to single
items etc. (using the 3 tiered Voyager hierarchy, as Karen mentioned below),
but the in-house suggestion now is that we keep all of the information in a
single bib, holding and item record.
From the user's point of view, however, it can be a challenge to
understand why an item is returned in the catalogue when it appears to have
nothing of interest in the main (title) fields.
Apologies for a rather wide ranging question, but I wonder if
anyone had any thoughts on this?
Best wishes,
Jane
Jane Gallagher | Senior Special Collections Assistant
Special Collections & Archives, Information Services, University of Kent
Templeman Library
Canterbury, Kent, CT2 7NU, UK
Tel: +44 (0)1227 823127
www.kent.ac.uk/library/specialcollections/index
<http://www.kent.ac.uk/library/specialcollections/index> |
blogs.kent.ac.uk/specialcollections | @UoKSpecialColls
From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Karen
Pierce
Sent: 15 April 2015 14:53
To: [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Standards and provenance
Hello,
I tend to put 'copy 1' or 'copy 2' etc in the field where I am recording
unique detail, I then note in the item record which copy it is (this is
using Voyager which has a 3 fold hierarchy - bib record, holding record, and
item record)
As I am not on the receiving end of users coming to request items I don't
know how well this works - but I would always assume that the staff member
in Special Collections would look up the record to check.
Karen
From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Katie
Flanagan
Sent: 15 April 2015 14:37
To: [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Standards and provenance
Hi Rhiannon,
Where I've had multiple copies of the same item, I've generally started each
field where I want to record something unique with the shelfmark of the item
in square brackets, to make it clear which item I'm referring to.
So:
561 [D4.5.10]Armorial bookplate of Fred Bloggs inside front board.
561 [H2.2.4]Pencil inscription on title-page: "Katie's book".
It seems to be easier to use a shelfmark (which the user would also use to
request the book), than an item ID, which is a string of numbers and, I
fear, more chance of introducing a typo?
Katie Flanagan BA(Hons), MA, MCLIP
Special Collections Librarian
T +44 (0)1895 266139
From: Rhiannon Lawrence-Francis [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 15 April 2015 14:27
To: Katie Flanagan; [log in to unmask]
<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM] Standards and provenance
Hello again everyone
I have also been puzzling over about how best to deal with the knotty
problem of how to represent copy-specific information in multiple copies of
the same edition.
To me, the most important thing to give readers information about what makes
the item "unique" - in the sense of it being in a hand-crafted binding,
perhaps with some pages missing, and some inserted, and bearing annotations,
inscriptions, bookplates and so on.
To a non-rare books cataloguer the important thing seems to identify the
edition, and then the number of copies the library holds.
How do colleagues resolve this? Would you ever create multiple bibliographic
records, i.e. one for each copy of the item? Or would you record
copy-specific information in one bibliographic record and give details of
each copy within that one record?
There are specific MARC codes for recording copy-specific information - 561
for provenance, 562 for details such as decorations, annotations and
imperfections, and 563 for bindings. This works if you only have one copy of
a certain item, but if you have two more, your MARC record would become very
unwieldy and in many cases ambiguous, which I would want to avoid at all
costs.
At Leeds we use Sierra for creating book records, but are able then to pull
these records through to EMu, the library management system used for Special
Collections materials. EMu can cope with having several different records
for several different copies of the same edition, and we can link them
together, import images, create narratives and so on.
When describing the incunabula here, I took the slightly unorthodox decision
of creating a new bibliographic record for each copy of the book. This meant
I could record in great detail provenance, decoration, annotations, bindings
and so on. It was one solution to the problem for the pore-1500 books, but
whether it can be applied more widely across the collections I doubt very
much.
I hope my questions / comments makes sense.
Rhiannon
From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Katie
Flanagan
Sent: 15 April 2015 14:00
To: [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM] Standards and provenance
Good afternoon, and welcome to the second session of the 'rare books
cataloguing' e-forum.
This afternoon we'll be focussing on standards and provenance, but please do
continue threads from this morning's session if you would like to.
Provenance is one of the areas where rare books cataloguing differs hugely
from other cataloguing. And, whilst normal cataloguing standards are
obviously also applicable to rare books, there are other standards to use on
top of this.
I've come up with some questions to start things off or please do ask your
own on these themes.
- What is provenance and why would you record it?
- How should you record it?
- Have you encountered any problems with recording it in catalogue
records, perhaps using a particular library system?
- Can you recommend any books and/or training material about
provenance and how to record it ?
- What standards do you use when cataloguing rare books? How do
they differ from other standards?
- Has anyone used RDA when cataloguing rare books?
- What do you do about subject headings?
Katie
Please note: I work Mon - Wed each week.
Katie Flanagan BA(Hons), MA, MCLIP
Special Collections Librarian
T +44 (0)1895 266139
Connect with me on <https://www.linkedin.com/pub/katie-flanagan/1b/471/bba>
LinkedIn, <https://twitter.com/KatieDFlanagan> Twitter
Brunel University London
Library
Bannerman Centre, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, UB8 3PH, United
Kingdom
T +44 (0)1895 266141
<http://www.brunel.ac.uk> www.brunel.ac.uk/library
Connect with the Library on <https://twitter.com/Brunel_Library> Twitter,
<https://www.facebook.com/#!/BrunelUniversityLibrary> Facebook,
<http://bookmarkdaily.wordpress.com/> WordPress
