Category:When to create a new record

From Ccslib.org

When two items are compared, and their content and format are identical, they should be subjected to the following criteria. These critera are more relaxed from those imposed by OCLC. Whereas OCLC is a bibliographic utility, the CCS database is primarily an automated catalog whose purpose is to satisfy the average public library patron's needs with ease and efficiency.

Consider the lists of major and minor differences on the pages in this category when deciding whether to add a new record to the local catalog.

Contents 1 Instructions 2 If one record will suffice 3 If multiple records are needed 4 Noncompliance with these guidelines 5 References

Instructions

1. The presence of a separate record in OCLC does not always mean that we must have a separate record in the local catalog. (See Bibliographic Formats & Standards, Chapter 4, Differences Between, Changes Within--and, for serials, the CONSER manual--for guidelines on when to create a new OCLC record.)
2. If the item in hand has one or more of the listed major differences from the existing record in the local catalog, add a new record.
3. If the item in hand only has one or more of the minor differences from the existing record in the local catalog, do not add a new record.
4. The existing record may not be the best record to cover the minor variations. Sometimes, it is better to replace the existing record with a different OCLC record rather than modify the existing record.
   • Example 1: The item in hand has an earlier publication date than the one in the database, but there are no major differences. Replace the existing record with one for the earlier publication and add a note describing the later publication.
   • Example 2: The item in hand is a hardcover and the existing record describes a trade paperback with the same or later publication date, but there are no major differences. Replace the existing record with the record for the hardcover.
   • Example 3: The item in hand is a hardcover and the existing record describes a trade paperback with an earlier publication date. Replace the existing record with the record for the hardcover and add a note explaining the earlier paperback date.
5. It does not matter on our local level if the last item attached to a record does not exactly match the master OCLC record when there are only minor differences involved. For the consortium's purposes, that record adequately describes that item.

6. As of August 3, 2011, this change has been approved in concept by the SCRAP committee, but the exact wording is still being adjusted. Please follow the changed rule(s). Please send any feedback to SCRAP.

   There must only be one treatment in the database for totally identical material—for example, either all libraries' holdings on one record or libraries' holdings split up across multiple records, or all libraries' holdings on a book record with accompanying sound recording or all libraries records on a sound recording record with accompanying book; but never both at once.[1][2] If such "duplicate" records have been created, please choose the record or records that are most appropriate and merge or split the other records accordingly. Some common situations affected by this rule: Series vs. set treatment Serials that need contents notes for each volume

7. Because no set of rules can cover all possible cases, there may be times when a "major" difference does not warrant a new record or a "minor" difference does warrant a new record, but these exceptions should be rare, and are best dealt with case by case at catalogers’ or SCRAP meetings.

If one record will suffice

Overlay or upgrade the existing record as needed. Be sure to include any ISBNs (qualified by publisher and binding, as appropriate) and series statements that differ between the versions. Also include a note providing the other version's publication data, any series statements that were added, and, optionally, any ISBNs that were added, so that future catalogers can know from which version each part of the description was taken.

When in doubt, don't merge or overlay!!

If multiple records are needed

The Public Access Services (PAS) group, the Database Management Task Force (DBMFT) the Standard Cataloging Rules and Practices (SCRAP) committee and the Cataloging Technical group of CCS all endorsed the following concept:

"Control numbers (LCCN, ISBN, ISSN) that apply to one record must not be duplicated another record. Adherence to this cataloging principle will allow proper loading of holdings into WorldCat as part of the state batchloading project."

If publishers reuse such control numbers for editions or titles that require a new record, those numbers must be in the proper "invalid" subfield (‡z for LCCN and ISBN, ‡y for ISSN) in records for all versions except the first-published.

Noncompliance with these guidelines

This is strongly discouraged, but when a library receives a copy that requires a new record according to these guidelines, that library may choose to attach it to an existing record. If this is done, the existing record must not be modified to reflect this nonstandard usage. The PUBLIC Item Extended Information note is the best place to indicate the item's actual ISBN, publisher, etc.

As of December 11, 2012, this change has been approved in concept by the SCRAP committee, but the exact wording is still being adjusted. Please follow the changed rule(s). Please send any feedback to SCRAP.

Such items must not be sent to fill ILL requests, as they are not what the requestor specifically requested.

References

1. ↑ SCRAP minutes, February/March 2007
2. ↑ Catalogers' minutes, June 2007