Talk:Hybrid material: Difference between revisions

(Created page)
 
(→‎Form Term: new section)
 
(7 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)


==Editing notes==
==Cataloger notes and queries==
Moved from original page
Moved from original Bard page
 
At 7/21/10 meeting, those present agreed simple addition of copy-specific notes in existing holdings records could be handled directly by the mss catalogers; all instances requiring *any* intervention in the book bib record (often necessary) and/or adding of a new holdings record should probably still go to the appropriate book cataloger. Okay to add a note of this exception of when coordination with other catalogers is not necessary? Or should I just put this on the manuscript cataloging wiki? (would point to this page for procedures when coordination is necessary, of course) ~nss 7/21/10


Request made by EGB during 7/21/10 meeting:  Indicate the correct formulation for the shelfmark for the item awaiting cataloging (while shelfmarks section on wiki gives information on formulation, the assignment of shelfmarks rests with the first cataloger to handle the material & some formulations can be a bit complicated (e.g. $m (printed content) or V.a.593, item 2)
*Add an example of a non-interleaved mss item  


**Request made 7/21/10: When possible, group notifications of hybrid materials in single e-mail for the convenience of the other cataloger**  
*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"?


%ORANGE%Add an example of a non-interleaved mss item %ENDCOLOR%
*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?


%ORANGE% (DJL) 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"?%ENDCOLOR%
== 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)


  * 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. %ORANGE%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? %ENDCOLOR%
== Form Term ==


  * When working with cards: Make a photocopy of the card(s), front and back, keeping records separate since they may be distributed to different catalogers. %ORANGE%I think some of these skipped annotated items are getting picked up again during clean-up phases of the MSS cataloging project (post-1701 catalogers have already identified several & prepared copy-specific info to be added by the modern materials cataloger, so appropriate to group these/notify by e-mail (rather than ask Eric to work from item+card)?~nss 7/21/10%ENDCOLOR%
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)