Talk:Hybrid material: Difference between revisions
(→Editing notes: Deleted extraneous notes) |
(→Form Term: new section) |
||
| (6 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== HBCN== | |||
Moderate | |||
* Use of 773 needs resolution | |||
* Review and integrate Integrated media, which had separate existence in Bard | |||
* Decide term: aspect, format, media, something else? | |||
--Deborah J. Leslie 14:36, 19 March 2014 (EDT) | |||
==Origin of page== | ==Origin of page== | ||
http://bard.folger.edu/cgi-bin/view.pl/Main/CentralLibrary/HybridCataloging --Deborah J. Leslie 17:36, 18 March 2014 (EDT) | http://bard.folger.edu/cgi-bin/view.pl/Main/CentralLibrary/HybridCataloging --Deborah J. Leslie 17:36, 18 March 2014 (EDT) | ||
: And http://bard.folger.edu/cgi-bin/view.pl/Main/CentralLibrary/GeneralCataloging#Integrated_media --Deborah J. Leslie 14:40, 19 March 2014 (EDT) | |||
== | ==Cataloger notes and queries== | ||
Moved from original page | Moved from original Bard page | ||
Add an example of a non-interleaved mss item | *Add an example of a non-interleaved mss item | ||
*For Sammelbands, adding the shelfmark of the other work is overkill, since the note will indicate the location within the volume, and the shelfmarks will differ only by a decimal point or "item x". Plus, if we do not require it here, the contents of such notes will be consistent with printed book bound-withs. ***AEB: Totally right, shelfmark here would be overkill I think I was thinking in terms of STC and Wing numbers for items that have MSS shelfmarks. So reword to: "and STC or Wing numbers if appropriate"? | *For Sammelbands, adding the shelfmark of the other work is overkill, since the note will indicate the location within the volume, and the shelfmarks will differ only by a decimal point or "item x". Plus, if we do not require it here, the contents of such notes will be consistent with printed book bound-withs. ***AEB: Totally right, shelfmark here would be overkill I think I was thinking in terms of STC and Wing numbers for items that have MSS shelfmarks. So reword to: "and STC or Wing numbers if appropriate"? | ||
*Make a host item added entry (773) for the work in the other aspect if the relationship is unequal (e.g., single item being cataloged is tipped into a volume containing a larger work). Include ǂ5 DFo if the work you are cataloging is published. DJL: This is problematic for published material; ǂ5 is not defined for field 773 and is not intended to be used for copy-specific added entries. Since the shelfmarks will be different, can we dispense with the 773, relying on the note and distinct shelfmarks? or use a regular associated work added entry? ***EB: Uh oh. I must have missed something. We used 773 to indicate where extra-illustrations can be found, in the Garrick project, see for example http://shakespeare.folger.edu/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?BBID=127083. Didn't the Morgan find a way to create hot-links between extra-illustrations and the books they're in? | *Make a host item added entry (773) for the work in the other aspect if the relationship is unequal (e.g., single item being cataloged is tipped into a volume containing a larger work). Include ǂ5 DFo if the work you are cataloging is published. DJL: This is problematic for published material; ǂ5 is not defined for field 773 and is not intended to be used for copy-specific added entries. Since the shelfmarks will be different, can we dispense with the 773, relying on the note and distinct shelfmarks? or use a regular associated work added entry? ***EB: Uh oh. I must have missed something. We used 773 to indicate where extra-illustrations can be found, in the Garrick project, see for example http://shakespeare.folger.edu/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?BBID=127083. Didn't the Morgan find a way to create hot-links between extra-illustrations and the books they're in? | ||
== Reciprocal access points == | |||
From Bard | |||
"Make reciprocal related work added entries in 700 ǂa / ǂt or 730 fields, identified as Folger-specific relations by use of "ǂ5 DFo" on cataloging records for published works." | |||
:I don't think this is necessary, since the wording in the note and the call number will both collocate hybrid works. Let's discuss when it comes up again. --Deborah J. Leslie 14:28, 19 March 2014 (EDT) | |||
== Form Term == | |||
At lunch today, Heather mentioned the desirability of a form term to collocate hybrid material. -- Deborah J. Leslie 14:13, 31 March 2014 (EDT) | |||
Latest revision as of 13:13, 31 March 2014
HBCN
Moderate
- Use of 773 needs resolution
- Review and integrate Integrated media, which had separate existence in Bard
- Decide term: aspect, format, media, something else?
--Deborah J. Leslie 14:36, 19 March 2014 (EDT)
Origin of page
http://bard.folger.edu/cgi-bin/view.pl/Main/CentralLibrary/HybridCataloging --Deborah J. Leslie 17:36, 18 March 2014 (EDT)
- And http://bard.folger.edu/cgi-bin/view.pl/Main/CentralLibrary/GeneralCataloging#Integrated_media --Deborah J. Leslie 14:40, 19 March 2014 (EDT)
Cataloger notes and queries
Moved from original Bard page
- Add an example of a non-interleaved mss item
- For Sammelbands, adding the shelfmark of the other work is overkill, since the note will indicate the location within the volume, and the shelfmarks will differ only by a decimal point or "item x". Plus, if we do not require it here, the contents of such notes will be consistent with printed book bound-withs. ***AEB: Totally right, shelfmark here would be overkill I think I was thinking in terms of STC and Wing numbers for items that have MSS shelfmarks. So reword to: "and STC or Wing numbers if appropriate"?
- Make a host item added entry (773) for the work in the other aspect if the relationship is unequal (e.g., single item being cataloged is tipped into a volume containing a larger work). Include ǂ5 DFo if the work you are cataloging is published. DJL: This is problematic for published material; ǂ5 is not defined for field 773 and is not intended to be used for copy-specific added entries. Since the shelfmarks will be different, can we dispense with the 773, relying on the note and distinct shelfmarks? or use a regular associated work added entry? ***EB: Uh oh. I must have missed something. We used 773 to indicate where extra-illustrations can be found, in the Garrick project, see for example http://shakespeare.folger.edu/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?BBID=127083. Didn't the Morgan find a way to create hot-links between extra-illustrations and the books they're in?
Reciprocal access points
From Bard "Make reciprocal related work added entries in 700 ǂa / ǂt or 730 fields, identified as Folger-specific relations by use of "ǂ5 DFo" on cataloging records for published works."
- I don't think this is necessary, since the wording in the note and the call number will both collocate hybrid works. Let's discuss when it comes up again. --Deborah J. Leslie 14:28, 19 March 2014 (EDT)
Form Term
At lunch today, Heather mentioned the desirability of a form term to collocate hybrid material. -- Deborah J. Leslie 14:13, 31 March 2014 (EDT)