Jump to Content
September 30, 2014
 
 
 
 
 

FAQ for Monographic Records Distribution

**NOTE: this is an archival document retained for historical purposes and is no longer maintained as of February 2010.**

The distribution of records from UC San Diego is imminent (best guess is early January). Various campuses have asked me various questions about the change, so I thought I would send out an FAQ which would combine these Q&A and give you the whys and wherefores of the process.

  1. Why is UCSD now going to be the agency distributing SCP records? And why did the California Digital Library stop?

    When work on the new MELVYL® Catalog began to make its presence felt, CDL staff asked us if we could take over the SCP record distribution. While there may be a few bumps in the road, most of the campuses see this as an advantage in that we will be posting files once a week.


  2. How will the records differ from what we get from CDL currently?

    The record content (both serial and mono) will be the same with the exception that we will not be stripping out some of the fields that CDL did before posting it to the campus servers. The following fields will be in the records. Each campus is encouraged to change their loaders (or load tables) to remove what they don't need.

    001 Control number (OCLC number). No change from current practice for serials or integrating resources; however, monographs will come through with an "e" following the OCLC number from which the record is derived.

    006 Additional material characteristics (slight change from past practice because of Dec.1st AACR rule changes and MARC format changes). See OCLC Bulletin 247. We will record new 006 values in records for integrating resources.

    690 Local UCSD discipline-based subject headings for ejournals (change from current practice–several campuses have asked for these to be left in the records; if you don't want them, please change your loader accordingly).

    710/730 Unique headings for e-resources packages (no change at this time from current practice for SERIALS)

    (791–not yet used) 793 Local fields for unique headings for monographic e-resources. These are equivalent to the 710/730 headings used in serials (new practice for monographs; see question 7 below).

    9XX Distribution fields (change from current practice). Up to this point you have not seen these fields (nor do you need to now). It's okay for you to change your loader (load tables) so that you won't import these. These tags were strictly for CDL-- 920 field indicated which libraries got that particular record; 932 field used by CDL in the PE display when there were multiple URLs in a serial record; 934 field used by CDL in the MELVYL Catalog display when there were multiple URLs in a monographic record; 950 field used by CDL in the PE display to indicate an amalgation of coverage.


  3. How will these records stay the same?

    007 Physical description fixed field (no change from current practice).

    590 CDL licensed database (no change from current practice).

    655 Genre heading for Online resources (no change from current practice).

    856 PIDs, BibPurls or permanent URLs (no change from current practice).


  4. Will e-monos come in the same file as e-serials?

    No, they will each have their own file. Integrating resources will be in the e-mono file for now, as they are still BLvl "m."


  5. What about these new monographic records? Why aren't we using the same "single-record" approach that we used for serials? Are the records "standard"? If not, how and why do they differ?

    The SCP Steering Committee had many conversations about monographic record sets and whether the SCP catalogers should distribute the "single record," the "separate record," or both the "single" and "separate" records. To make a long story short, we have been instructed by HOTS and SOPAG to create and distribute "separate record" sets. This was determined to be the easiest way for the campuses that are the receivers of the records to get them. They can park them with the least amount of angst about having to dedupe the records.

    Once it became apparent that most all of the records for the e-monographs were reproductions we realized that we could use LCRI 1.11A (see LC's Cataloging Service Bulletin no. 89, Summer 2000) as a basis for creating bib records. When we began cataloging SCP monographs two years ago, we were counting on OCLC to create "separate records" for us based on our enhancing the print records with adding URLs.

    With new upgrades to our Innovative Millenium system, SCP realized that we no longer have to wait for OCLC, but we can harness technology to create separate records ourselves at a much faster and more flexible pace. We will use our existing records (complete with URLs) and convert these to standard "separate" records. For all monographic records we will add a Form byte "s" in the fixed field, a subfield "h" in the 245 for [electronic resource]; a 533 field for Electronic reproduction. In addition we will cause the automatic addition of an "e" after the OCLC number in the 001 field and the transferrance of the print ISBN to the 776 field subfield "z." These records, with the single exception of the "e" added after the OCLC number are standard records. They will not be found in OCLC–only the closely related print records will be found there.


  6. How do these monographic records fit in with the existing integrating resources (databases) we have been receiving?

    The current IR (database) records are also "separate" records. There will be some cataloging changes in these records as we now have a rather substantial group of new rules with which to contend. I will not be redoing them just to upgrade them to the new rules but if I need to recatalog them for some other reason, I will make all necessary changes to bring them up to date. The true monographic records are for static resources and will not normally require the kind of changes that are needed in serials and integrating resources. For the time being (at least through until July 2003) monographs and integrating resources will both be coded in the fixed field as Type "a" and BLvl "m." Eventually monographs will continue to be coded this way, but integrating resources will be coded as Type "a" and BLvl "i" Integrating resources may eventually get their own file, but this has yet to be determined.


  7. Does SCP do any maintenance in OCLC for shared cataloging records?

    We are a CONSER enhance institution so we can do maintenance for serials. We add URLs to print serial records, in addition to closing off ceased records and title changes. If the URLs change, we do update the OCLC records. In addition, we upgrade URLs as needed in our OCLC WorldCat Collection monographic sets. We supply BibPurls in master OCLC records, but not PIDs.


  8. Why is the 791/ 793 field for monographs being used in this most orthodox way?

    UCSD has always used (in our Roger record) a 793 field to collocate record sets for ourselves. For us the important reason to use a unique title, was so that we could use it to retrieve all consituent titles in a monographic or serial set--it didn't matter what the title "hook" was, just so we could identify the records as belonging to a particular group. It was only for SCP records that we took pains to try to use an authorized heading in a 710 or a 730 field. Times change, and now it would appear that, while the purpose of the unique title--that of collocation, hasn't changed, the method has. One of the campuses (with general agreement from everyone on the SCP Steering Committee) asked that we use a 793 (title) or a 791 (author) field in order to differentiate them automatically from existing entries in the record. The use of 791 is still under discussion by the SCP Steering Committee and does not appear in any records at this time.


Last updated: December 14, 2012
Document owner: Adolfo Tarango