Re: Cataloguing Records for Remote-Access Electronic Serials (Giles Martin) ERCELAA@ctrvax.Vanderbilt.Edu 08 Feb 1995 03:38 UTC
Date: Tue, 07 Feb 1995 15:31:53 +1100 From: Giles S Martin <ulgsm@DEWEY.NEWCASTLE.EDU.AU> Subject: RE: Cataloguing records for remote-access electronic serials Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-To: Jones Wayne <WAJ@ABS.NLC-BNC.CA> X-cc: CONSERlist <consrlst@sun7.loc.gov>, Emedia <emedia@vax1.elon.edu>, SERIALST <serialst@uvmvm.uvm.edu>, VPIEJ-L <vpiej-l@vtvm1.cc.vt.edu> I read this message on the Emedia list, but at the risk of duplication I am posting it to all the lists that Wayne Jones posted it to. You need different bibliographic records if there are significant differences in the hardware or software needed to view/read/use a document. For that reason, you would need separate record for the Word and for the WordPerfect versions -- in each case you either need the appropriate word-processing program, or a program capable of reading that format. Further, if you had the same file in WordPerfect version 5.1 and in WordPerfect version 6, you would need dseparate records for each version. The formatting codes are different, you can have formats in WP version 6 that are not available in WP version 5.1, and WP version 5.1 cannot read a WP version 6 document. It's a pain, I know, having all those bibliographic records for the same intellectual content. I wish we could use some sort of multiple versions solution, but a satisfactory multiple versions answer will need substantial changes to the USMARC bibliographic format -- I don't believe that you can do everything that people want to do in multiple versions with the USMARC holdings format. #### ## Giles Martin ####### #### Quality Control Section ################# University of Newcastle Libraries #################### New South Wales, Australia ###################* E-mail: ulgsm@dewey.newcastle.edu.au ################### Phone: (049) 215 828 (Australia) ##### ## ### +61 49 215 828 (International) Fax: (049) 215 833 (Australia) ## +61 49 215 833 (International) On Mon, 6 Feb 1995, Jones Wayne wrote: > Significant technical or access differences should also necessitate > separate records. *Significant* ones only, though. For example, if a > remote-access serial existed in Hypertext, ASCII, PostScript, Word, and > WordPerfect versions, I would say -- keeping in mind that my knowledge of > PostScript is somewhere between nil and meagrely informed -- that there are > 3 versions (and 3 records) here. One for the HyperText, one for PostScript, > and one for the other ones. I don't think differences in text-formatting are > alone enough to qualify for versions.