212 field (3 messages) ANN ERCELAWN 08 Sep 1993 16:05 UTC
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 1993 09:05:36 MST-0700 From: Vicki Milam <MILAM_V@FRANGO.HSC.COLORADO.EDU> Subject: RE: 212 field (Thomas Sanders) Whether or not the 212 abbreviation is the same as that used by indexing tools depends entirely on the indexing tool in question. Since we are a medical library, our patrons depend on MedLine to a great extent. We added a 246 to carry the NLM abbreviation so patrons could directly search the abbreviation in our PAC. Maybe not a legitimate use of the 246, but patrons' needs come first. Vicki Vicki Milam (303/270-6447) Denison Library University of Colorado Health Sciences Center milam_v@frango.hsc.colorado.edu _______________________________________ Date: 08 Sep 1993 08:12:23 -0800 (PST) From: Anne Lobe <lobe@WLN.COM> Subject: RE: 212 field (Thomas Sanders) It should be the entry under which the serial appears in the catalog. Depending upon the catalog entry, it would be one of the following: the titile proper, the main entry name heading and title proper, the maine entry name heading/ uniform title, main entry name heading/uniform title/title proper, main entry uniform title headining, or main entry uniform title heading/title proper. Anne Lobe/ Serials Review, WLN ________________________________________ Date: 08 Sep 1993 11:32:08 -0400 (EDT) From: "Julia C. Blixrud" <jblix@CNI.ORG> Subject: RE: 212 field (Thomas Sanders) Ten years ago, the CONSER Abstracting & Indexing Coverage Project tried to do just what you are asking for. As a by-product for adding information on where journals are indexed or abstracted (the 510 field in CONSER MARC- Serial records), we provided secondary services with verified bibliographic information for the titles they covered. That data included the 210 field (not 212) which is the key title field (222) abbreviated according to International Standard ISO-4, the standard used by the international ISSN centers. We hoped the secondary services would take advantage of that data and include it in their own systems. Some did, especially those in science and technology (e.g., Chemical Abstracts Service and Biological Abstracts) who had also been using that standard. Others, particularly those with long established print products, were happy with their own abbreviations and we in the project hoped that at least they would add ISSN to their internal serials file for future matching purposes. I believe some of the problems with the use of ISO-4 abbreviations were that they were not short enough. That can be argued (and has been), but there is a difference in creating unique abbreviations for a file of 600 periodicals versus a file of over 600,000 titles and the standard tries to address the latter. I believe there are systems that index the 210 and I hope some of them will comment on its usefulness. The National Serials Data Program continues to work with abstracting and indexing services to both add their coverage information to the CONSER database and to provide the services with standardized data. Whether the services make use of the data is up to them. It certainly would simplify the users searching if they could search abbreviations online. All interlibrary loan staff will agree that most users are not successful in extrapolating titles from their abbreviations. Perhaps your encouragement to the services to use international standards would help to answer your question: can we trust the abbrevations? The current short answer is: sometimes. -- Julia C. Blixrud, Program Officer and former CONSER A&I Coverage Project Manager Council on Library Resources 1400 16th Street, N.W., Suite 510 Washington, D.C. 20036-2217 Internet: jblix@cni.org (202) 483-7474