Dancing As Fast As We Can:
Keeping Our Feet Moving Amidst Rapid Change (Opening Session)
The OLAC/MOUG Decennial Conference opened with a presentation
by Karen Horny. Horny summarized well the present state of
affairs for those of us in the AV cataloging world. One of the
special challenges facing us today is the continual proliferation
of new formats (videos, compact discs, multimedia, etc.) and
Internet resources (electronic journals, Gophers, the World Wide
Web, Mosaic, etc.). Horny described three facets to the
challenge these materials pose for us:
Presenter: Karen Horny, Northwestern University
In the area of efficiency, Horny stressed the need to maintain our commitment to shared cataloging. The development of core bibliographic records could play a role in helping us to maintain efficiency, but she cautioned against the outcome of inadequate access to materials. Not shying away from controversy, Horny also recommended the consideration of 'outsourcing' for certain types of materials, especially when doing so would prove cost-beneficial.
In the area of continuing education, Horny introduced the possibility of using instructional technology, such as hypertext, for the training of staff and users at all levels. She also mentioned more traditional modes of education such as seminars, interest groups, and conferences. Whatever the educational setting, Horny stressed the need to always share what we have learned with our colleagues.
Overall, Horny's message was one of encouragement and hope. She believes that we as AV catalogers are especially well-positioned to deal with new types of materials, given our considerable experience as information organization specialists.
Education for the Digital Future (Opening
The second presentation of the Opening Session was given by
Carolyn O. Frost. Frost shared with us her personal vision for
the future of AV cataloging. She discussed the characteristics
of the new digital information environment, the challenges of
creating access to materials in this environment, and the ways
that Information and Library Studies programs are educating
future professionals to meet these challenges.
Presenter: Carolyn O. Frost, U. of Michigan, School of Library and Information Science
The new digital information environment differs from the traditional paper-based one in many ways. One of the most fundamental differences can be seen in the existence of multimedia collections. The universe of digital information is already gigantic in scale and it is ever-growing, ever-changing. Existing collections are very diverse and are physically distributed throughout the world.
How are we to cope with this enormous, mutable universe of digital information? Frost recommended that we look for ways to utilize our existing cataloging skills in this new environment. For example, we should find ways to apply classification schemes to Gophers and Mosaic on the Internet. If we find that item-level cataloging is simply not feasible, we should look to other traditions of description (those of museums and archives, for example) to create access to digital information. For subject indexing we should consider the use of multiple thesauri. In short, we need to apply existing systems of organization to new contexts and be open to the possibility of broadening our skills, incorporating (or creating) other systems of description and access.
Sharing from her experiences at the University of Michigan (U of M), Frost explained how the curriculum in Information and Library Studies is changing. Core courses are being broadened to deal effectively with new technology, and new areas of specialization are being added. The methods of teaching are also changing, to include more experiential, hands-on learning (student projects that encourage creative thinking and the incorporation of newer technologies, for example). Professors are also encouraged to integrate their personal research into classroom teaching.
Frost explained in some detail three grant-funded projects that are taking place presently at U of M. One such project is the Art History Image Database Project, supported by the U.S. Department of Education. Frost is helping to design a prototype system for browsing digitized images (art slides) by using descriptive categories such as artist, title, country, medium, and technique. Ultimately, the project is meant to result in an organized, searchable database of 3,000 digitized images.
Frost's presentation was enlightening and inspiring. In a time when schools of Information and Library Studies are being closed down, it is indeed encouraging to hear of a program that is receiving grants and intentionally evolving to meet the informational needs of our technological society.
Both training and management should be based on principles, with an emphasis on judgment and decision-making skills. Cataloging should be defined in terms of function and access rather than in terms of conformity to rules and achievement of the "perfect record;" training should be considered part of professional service; and support should be given to cooperative ventures and continuing education. Catalogers should have ongoing contact with the users of the catalog, with special efforts in that direction needed in larger institutions, and should be given access to the professional literature and opportunity and encouragement to meet in groups and confer by such means as e-mail. Swanekamp believes further that a cataloger with subject or language expertise should be able to apply that knowledge to the cataloging of materials in any physical format.
Swanekamp emphasized that institutions and administrators, not catalogers themselves, have the responsibility for providing training. Contrary to the fears of many catalogers, results just coming in from another survey indicate that among administrators in large institutions, at least, support for rethinking the training and management of catalogers is strong (though as a questioner later pointed out, such statements do not always translate into actions). Library schools also have an important role that needs attention, especially in light of the fact that some library schools no longer include cataloging in their core curricula and that many department heads report increasing difficulty in finding entry-level catalogers who do not require extensive training.
The CCC's involvement with these issues is ongoing. Its survey should be released in the near future, and a grant has been proposed to fund training programs, including the preparation of training materials. Swanekamp believes that these activities, along with changing conditions surrounding cataloging (such as the demanding materials that increasingly make up our backlogs and the recognition that LC cannot supply all of our cataloging) are contributing to a greater appreciation of catalogers and a wider recognition of the training and support we need to do our jobs effectively.
Richard A. Stewart
Chicago Public Library
After summarizing the lectures and workshops, Intner shared her own analysis stimulated by what she had seen and heard at the conference. Not only had the participants received knowledge for their heads, but also moral support for their professional souls to fortify them in the future to address problems raised by the conflicts which currently prevail in cataloging. Intner went on to mention some of the broader issues impacting cataloging, such as institutional reductions, changes in demographics, new technology and the information explosion.
However, in the midst of this present matrix of change and conflict, Intner envisions a future where the present conflicts, problems and questions are resolved. What will this future be? She surmises that many catalogers will leave library settings and join information production by providing pre-publication cataloging for university and commercial presses. Catalogers who remain in libraries will tailor cataloging copy to local user needs through the reference interview, while subject searching will become ever more important and nonprint media will predominate. In essence, catalogers who remain in libraries will become either public service librarians or systems experts. However, this vision, according to Intner, will only come to fruition as catalogers prepare to work with intellectual content not physical carriers, become experts in bibliographic consulting and place each client and service in a global perspective to be managed efficiently and effectively.
Intner believes that OLAC and MOUG can be key players in resolving the present conflicts and ushering in this new reality for the cataloging community. However, in order to accomplish this task, efforts to educate and train must be increased by expanding communication through publication and conferences. Cataloging rules and tools must be improved to cover all information resources and to enhance access. Finally, Intner encourages members to expand their vision, capture decision-making power and use it wisely.
Diane Dates Casey
Governors State University
A random sample of OLUC personal name headings had revealed that approximately 43% were correct and had corresponding records present in the NAF; 40% were correct but had no authority records; and 17% contained either variant forms or typographical errors. Common mistakes in headings were in birth or death dates or fullness of name. Other errors corrected included wrong subfield codes, names entered in direct order, variant forenames, wrong indicators, and use of maiden names.
At the present time only OCLC and Ohio State University are actively involved in the project. The Library of Congress may join before the end of this year, and the Committee on Institutional Cooperation libraries will join later. Diaz suggested that the project could benefit from having the bibliographical records swept by format, directing related headings to catalogers who deal with specific media.
In response to a question from Judy Sandstrom, Diaz predicted that the procedures would eventually become practice for all OCLC cataloging participants, but that OCLC was "starting small." In response to a question from Gabriel Pellegrino of Rochester Public Library, Diaz confirmed that there is a database of preferred forms left from the OLUC sampling which should have authority records created.
Use of handouts or more overhead projections with examples might have made some of the concepts easier to understand. After the presentation, some people expressed the wish that more research in the field had been described; others had hoped for more practical applications and less discussion of research.
Judith A. Sandstrom
Arlington Heights Memorial Library
Computer File Cataloging
Olson, author of many publications relating to cataloging
audiovisual materials and a practicing cataloger, conducted the
workshop on the issues, intricacies and complications involved in
cataloging computer files. She emphasized the descriptive
aspects of cataloging computer software and guided the workshop
participants through relevant AACR2R rules and Library of
Congress Rule Interpretations. In the process, she demonstrated
solutions to typical problems.
Presenter: Nancy B. Olson, Mankato State University
Because technology changes faster than the cataloging rules, Olson discussed the difficulty and importance of correctly matching the appropriate cataloging rules and chapters to the item in hand. She repeatedly emphasized the "one rule at a time, one decision at a time" principle. As variations of materials begin to appear, she also stressed the need for familiarity with the rules. It is necessary to determine whether given items are interactive or independent. Olson suggested the example of the Barbie doll package. A package that contains one Barbie and two computer disks represents a cataloging problem: do you identify the package as a doll plus disks, or as two disks plus a doll? Olson used this as a good example of a kit where each item could be used independently.
Olson further pointed out how the rules for computer files differ from corresponding rules in other chapters; for example, the chief source of information. With computer software, because of the inability to run the material if equipment is not readily available, she suggested that if you cannot get to the title screen, use the title on the label or disk package. In all cases it is important to provide a note of the source. If there are many parts to an item and each part has a different title ("happiness is having one title"), prefer the one that has the most complete information.
Olson referred to the differences in the edition area for computer files. Publishers seldom use the term "edition." There are "updates," "supple-ments," and "versions." Whichever term is found on the item is used in the edition statement. Olson suggested indicating early in the record which version is in hand and using notes to link different versions.
She went over the serial characteristics of computer files and how to handle these along with the file characteristics for computer data and Internet sources. In exploring the physical description of the materials, she referred to the new rule interpretation of discs/disks. Give the diameter of the disc/disk in inches, to the quarter-inch. The spelling "disc" reflects the standardized spelling used by the computer industry for optical storage devices. The spelling "disk" is used for magnetic storage devices.
Olson went over the importance of specific notes and the need to make a nature and scope note of the file and the need and relevance of the system requirements note. If the information is available it should be provided in a note. If a backup tape exists in the package, explain it in a note.
Olson stressed the need to provide the same kind of subject access to software as for books. She emphasized the importance of headings that fit categories and genre headings. In addition, subject headings should be assigned to say what the item is about; and it is also important to say what it is. She concluded by giving examples to illustrate educational and fantasy games.
Loyola University, Chicago
Over the past few years the library community has been hearing
much about format integration (FI) and there have been ongoing
discussions about the impact it will have on our cataloging
efforts. Final implementation dates are now fast approaching and
the desire for fuller understanding of FI is apparent. Patton
presented an excellent overview and explanation covering what has
happened already and a timetable for future implementation.
Presenter: Glenn Patton, OCLC
One of the implications of FI is that redundancy and inconsistencies will lessen. Catalogers will be able to explain more fully the item being cataloged through use of additional tags. The result will be a format that is more flexible in cataloging, especially for audiovisual items and forthcoming media technologies. Patton assured us that FI will assist in enabling us to provide more useful information within the MARC structure without omitting any vital essentials. The result should be a record we can better utilize in the future.
The first and probably the biggest change is the extension of content designators so that all media can be assigned whatever tag is needed to appropriately describe the item. With this decision, conflicts and redundancy became apparent between some of the formats, resulting in multiple places in which information might be placed. Negotiations and discussion over the past several years have resolved these problems, with some tags becoming obsolete. Examples include the use of 310 and 321 in serials for the information which for maps and computer files is tagged 315. It was decided that tag 315 would become obsolete.
Changes to the Leader for the Type of Record (06) with "b" Archival and manuscript control becoming obsolete, and the addition of two new types, "p" Mixed material, and "t" Manuscript language material, will further assist cataloging. Also, Type of Control (08) will in the future show the Archival status with "blank," No specified type of control, or with "a," Archival control. These new codes will now allow us to show not only the "Archivalness" of an item, but also its medium.
In order to further describe an item, field 006 will be added for Fixed-length Data Elements; it will show additional material characteristics. The first character will be "Record Type." Characters 1-17 will enable catalogers to describe the item in more detail than is presently possible with field 008. For example, we will be able to describe all the aspects in a map which is also a puzzle.
Fields 246 and 740, Additional Title information, will also present major changes for monograph catalogers. Serials catalogershave been using 246 for varying forms of the title for some time, while monograph catalogers have used field 740 for varying title forms along with other uncontrolled titles. Now, with the availability of field 246 for all formats, some of the information we have been placing in field 740 will more appropriately be tagged 246. Such information includes: varying title for the whole work; subtitle; parallel title; and abbreviations or numbers within the title. Field 740 will be restricted to use for uncontrolled analytical titles and other related titles.
Another result will be the "cleanup" of elements that have never been used, such as serial tags 320, 330, and 331, and of obsolete indicators (2nd indicator of field 1XX; 1st indicator of field 260). Such obsolete information will continue to exist in older records (although some systems may choose, as OCLC has with the 1XX and 260 indicators, to convert them) but will not be used in new ones.
The schedule for implementation is still very flexible and subject to change. It is projected that by January 1995 everything except the fixed fields (Leader, 006, 007, and 008) will have been implemented. The fixed field information should be completed by the end of 1995.
Patton recommended the following sources of further information: Format Integration and its Effect on USMARC Bibliographic Format, prepared by Network Development and MARC Standards Office; available from LC's Cataloging Distribution Service; and Format Integration and Its Effect on Cataloging, Training and Systems (ALCTS Papers on Library Technical Services and Collections, no. 4), available from the American Library Association.
Follett Software Co., McHenry, IL
The first difficulty in cataloging these materials is in determining whether the item in hand is truly interactive multimedia. To qualify, it must exhibit both of the following characteristics: 1) user-controlled, non-linear navigation using computer technology; and 2) the combination of two or more media that the user manipulates to control the order and/or nature of the presentation. In general, most pre-1993 materials would not qualify as interactive multimedia.
If the material does qualify, then the guidelines must be consulted in order to properly construct the bibliographic description. The session provided a field-by-field discussion of the cataloging of these materials, with much detail and examples. A recurring refrain throughout was the advice, "Don't agonize!" -- a reminder for catalogers to trust their judgment and to do the best they can without becoming obsessed with small decisions.
Practical handouts, with examples and definitions, added to the session's value for those needing to better understand and catalog this material.
Arlington Heights Memorial Library
Topics covered included map cataloging resources, calculation of scale, how to date a road map, and the major differences between book and map cataloging. Participants examined sample map bibliographic records, received scale exercise homework, and saw a sample map workform.
Resources for map cataloging included, in addition to AACR2R,Cartographic Materials: A Manual of Interpretation for AACR2 prepared by the Anglo-American Cataloging Committee for Cartographic Materials (CM), and the Map Cataloging Manual (MCM) prepared by the Geography and Map Division, Library of Congress. The addresses for two sources of the natural scale indicator/map scale indicator were listed, and a brief bibliography of books about maps, mapmaking, and map librarianship was provided.
The major differences between book and map cataloging in the physical description include 1) the chief source is the entire map (AACR2R 3.0B2); 2) the title is chosen on the basis of sequence, layout, or comprehensiveness (AACR2R 23.1B3), and CM 1B8b); 3) the definition of prominence is defined as anywhere in any size type (AACR2R 0.8); 4) bracket additional place name information in the subtitle if it is not present in the title proper or misleading (AACR2R 3.1E2); 5) map-unique notes, such as the note for additional content of the map not represented by the title, justification for the date of situation (the date the data was taken) in the call number, and the type of relief (contours, form lines, gradient tints, hachures, pictorial, satellite imagery, shading, soundings, spot heights, etc. (AACR2R 3.7B1 and MCM p.3.6-3.12)); and 6) other notes, such as the source of the title proper whenever it is not taken from the recto (MCM p.3.14-3.18), a statement of responsibility note containing the name of the copyright holder (MCM p.2.2 and p.5.2), and contents notes in specific order of recto, verso, and cover (MCM p.3.30).
Main entry was also discussed. The main entry "is based less on prominence and more on who did what." The cartographer has to perform more than the mechanics of the drawing in order to receive main entry, while a corporate body would receive main entry only when it is a map-making body (AACR2R 21.2B2f). Often title main entry wins because there is no statement of responsibility.
Workshop participants were exposed to map terminology, such as orientation, inset maps, ancillary maps, neat lines, and view; and were made aware of the fact that some forms of map reproduction could affect the accuracy of scale. With this thorough introduction, attendees were ready to return to their institutions and begin.
Ruth A. Inman
University of Illinois at Chicago
The uniform title and music subject heading examples, along with the AACR2R rules and Music Cataloging Decisions that applied, provided invaluable information. Concisely arranged examples were given for determining the titles, listing the field indicators, and punctuation required. Subject headings for both instrumental and vocal music were discussed, and a "Handy chart to those darned chorus subject headings" was included as well as the period subdivisions for jazz and popular music and guidelines for their use. Practice exercises for uniform titles and subject headings were provided along with the answers.
During the presentation, Koth explained what information each MARC field should contain and where to obtain that information. Although the Library of Congress (LC) no longer uses the 045 (Date of composition), 047 (Form of Composition) or 048 (Instrumentation) fields, she recommends supplying them. Field 028 contains the label or matrix numbers, but Koth has not encountered matrix numbers except in the case of the Russian label Melodiya. The label number should always be given in the first note. When deciding whether the orchestra or the conductor should receive main entry status, choose whichever name appears prominently, in larger print. The "c" date appearing in the 260 field usually represents the copyright date of the artwork accompanying the sound recording rather than the date of the recording itself. If some of the selections are mono, a note "Some selections mono." is appropriate. Koth clarified where the durations for selections should be given; if there is only one work, the duration appears in field 300; if two or more works, the durations appear in a note field (when there is a collective title, the durations will follow the titles in field 505; when there is no collective title and each title is given in the 245 field, the durations will appear in a 500 field). In regard to added entries: the LCRIs limit the number, but catalogers nevertheless need to take their own collections and patrons into account when providing them.
This very worthwhile workshop presented a vast amount of information. The handouts will be very helpful in the future.
Cook Memorial Library, Libertyville, IL
Stancu and Burnett projected transparencies of the examples in the handout and other examples while discussing the questions and related matters. Topics covered included: principal performer as main entry; tagging for motion picture soundtracks; composer vs. performing group as main entry; composer's name as title proper; an LP with two different labels; etc. Nearly fifty people attended each of the two sessions, generating many questions and comments from the floor. The presenters tended to endorse local practice over rigid adherence to LC policy, if local practice would yield more complete records for the national utilities.
There was some discussion of sources for help in music cataloging. Some basic titles mentioned were: Richard P. Smiraglia's Music Cataloging; Jay Weitz's Music Coding and Tagging; the Music Library Association's Report of the Working Group on Types of Compositions; and the Music OCLC Users Group's The Best of MOUG.
Judith A. Sandstrom
Arlington Heights Memorial Library
MIM was developed in 1988 by the National Moving Image Database Standards Committee of the National Center for Film and Video Preservation at the American Film Institute. A sample page was included in the handout.
Miller differentiated between a subject heading as the "aboutness" of a work and an f/g heading as the "isness." "Isness" can mean content (a documentary) or physical nature (a video), though we focused on content. Although LCSH contains some headings which are designated for use as f/g -- historical films, for example -- its coverage of f/g headings is anything but complete. Some terms can be used only as f/g descriptors (Comedy programs); some are disallowed in LCSH or are shuttled to another inappropriate heading (Magazines -- see Periodicals).
So-- what is a confused cataloger to do? Use both LCSH and MIM carefully, reading scope notes and watching for overlap. "Soap operas" appear in both lists and could create ambiguity in the same index. Some libraries add "--History and criticism," or something similar, for further clarification.
The next part of the presentation dealt with USMARC authorities applications for f/g terms, authorized USMARC coding, and the way various vendors might link, display, or cross-reference these headings. Examples were provided.
Miller then proceeded to describe his research examining levels of compatibility between MIM and LSCH headings in his shared database. He found that, although the majority of terms did not conflict, some had conceptual overlap and a few others were fine in MIM but disallowed in LCSH. Without database cleanup, patrons get mixed retrievals and inconsistent access. These possibilities pose several questions for cataloging managers, such as: which vocabularies to use and for what; subdivision or qualification of terms for added clarity; and how terms will index and display.
Miller thinks that efforts at international consistency will result in local adoption of more coherent policies. He is confident that f/g and subject headings will be able to live happily ever after in the same database.
Lake Forest Library
John's portion of the session, titled "Subjectivity in Cyberspace," concerned subject retrieval on the Internet. She stressed the need for catalogers to get involved, as they have the skills necessary to define the finding aids for the Internet (that is to say, there is no need for "techies" to have to reinvent the wheel). John stated that some exciting things are happening in regard to the cataloging of Internet resources, but that one must realize that perhaps only 15% of what is on the Internet is of a permanence that merits being cataloged. The idea of a "self-cataloging" Gopherspace was presented. John also presented the results of research which analyzed search terms used on the Internet, and drew tentative conclusions from that research. Because of their unique experience in designing and using information access systems, John emphasized, the more catalogers are involved in Internet retrieval issues the better Cyberspace will be.
Arlington Heights Memorial Library
Weitz discussed the importance of subject information in summary and contents notes. These notes are now retrievable on OCLC through keyword searching. He discussed various AACR2R rules, LCRIs, and MARC fields, as outlined below.
Rule 7.7B10 (Physical description note): Field 538 has been expanded to include audiovisual materials as well as computer files. Therefore, the descriptions Beta, VHS, and U-matic are now recorded in that field instead of field 300. Sound characteristics may also be included and these notes may be combined; for example: "VHS, stereo., hi-fi."
Rules 7.5B2 and 1.5B4 (Durations): If the playing time is stated on the item, give the time. The LCRI does not apply the option to give approximate time. Weitz stressed that catalogers should use caution and be tolerant of duration differences in bibliographic records. Variations of durations from the container, label, and actual timing of a video should not result in the inputting of duplicate records. If the container says "approximately," do not put "ca." in the record; rather, use "ca." only when the cataloger is estimating the duration.
Country of publication code: In the AV format this field is coded differently from other formats. The country of the producing agency is coded from $c of field 245 rather than from data in field 260. Weitz expects that under format integration, coding of the AV country code fixed field will be brought into line with the coding of that element for all other types of materials.
Statement of responsibility (Field 245 $c): This includes people and corporate bodies with overall responsibility. LCRIs 7.1F1 and 8.1F1 state that producers, directors and writers are to be credited with overall responsibility. An audience member commented that many records are listing executive producers in field 245; Weitz responded that their responsibilities are varied but not necessarily overall, and so they should not be included in 245 $c, though it may be appropriate to include them in field 508.
LCRIs 7.7B6 and 8.7B6 delineate responsibilities for a particular segment or aspect of the work to be listed in a credits note (field 508). LCRI 21.29D specifies when added entries should be made; all corporate bodies listed in field 260 are included. An added entry should be made even when the rules don't specify so, if the cataloger judges the corporate body of sufficient importance.
Weitz discussed the criteria for entering a new record into the OCLC database, as follows. Black and white versus color; sound versus silent; substantive differences in length, tape format, publication and copyright dates; and letter boxed versus full frame, all justify a new record. A colorized motion picture may also have an edition statement to this effect.
Length: Determine if there is a significant difference before inputting a new record. Look for other evidence of the existence of different versions of a video, differences that may indicate versions of varying lengths. For example: an instructional versus a theatrical version justifies a new record. Small time differences are probably due to the information being taken from different portions of the item or from actually timing the item; these do not justify a new record.
Dates: It can be helpful to know when various types of AV tapes became commercially available. Beta videos first appeared in May 1975; VHS tapes in Sept. 1977. Package redesign often causes a new copyright date to appear on the container. If the date is for the artwork on the package, it can be recorded in a note but is not bibliographically significant. However, the date on a container can be significant if it is not a copyright date for the package artwork. Account for all dates and give as much information in notes as possible. Also, bracket dates in field 260 if the source is other than the film frames or video container.
Descriptive Video Services (DVS) tapes for the visually impaired justify a new record. This information may be input as an edition statement if it is presented as such on the item. Changes to 7.7B2 are in the works to expand the application of the rule beyond closed-captioning to include other sorts of audio and video enhancement. The language note for closed-captioning will be included in field 546 with format integration in January 1995. It is important to indicate if an item is closed-captioned, and this information is not always listed on the title screen or in the credits. Closed-captioning may be indicated by special symbols; a note is required, as well as the subject heading "Video recordings for the hearing impaired."
Weitz discussed locally made videorecordings, including locally produced, locally recorded, and off-air recordings. OCLC's manual, Bibliographic Formats and Standards, has guidelines for such records. Weitz also recommended Verna Urbanski's Cataloging Unpublished Nonprint Materials (Soldier Creek Press, 1992).
Weitz's final point of discussion concerned publisher numbers and the universal product code (UPC). Currently, publisher numbers are entered in field 037 and/or a 500 note field. With format integration, field 028 will be used instead. This field will be indexed and allows for generation of notes and added entries. Both the UPC and the international article number (formerly the European article number) will be entered in field 024 upon implementation of format integration.
College of DuPage, Glen Ellyn, IL