On Thu, 12 Feb 1998, Kathleen Thorne wrote:

> Good morning - I have a couple of questions for all you serials
> catalogers: first: when you use OCLC bibliographic records for
> cataloging materials, do you upgrade the records to current AACR2
> standards if the record is an older one created under AACR standards, or
> do you use the record in the exact form you find it?

We always upgrade form of access points, but don't routinely upgrade
description.

  Exceptions:

1.  We never use latest entry records for
currently received titles (and only rarely for dead ones) because we use
the ISSNs for hooks to holdings in the MELVYL Union Catalog.  Likewise we
want our records to merge with other MELVYL records.

2.  If the serial is analyzed and the AACR2 choice of entry is different
so the series statement under A2 is different than preA2, we recatalog.

3.  If recataloging to A2 would reduce the number of successive records
(i.e., entry under title instead of corporate author), we consider
recataloging, particularly if it would cause our records to merge in MELVYL.

One important important point is that changing the Description to AACR2,
means changing it completely to AACR2: basing description on earliest
issue, following rules for choice of access points, etc.  It is
unacceptable to supply ISBD punctuation on a preAACR record and declare
it AACR2.

We are CONSER Enhance participants so our recataloging is done in OCLC.

> And second question: if you have journals which were cataloged &
> classified back in the days preceding computer access to OCLC/LC
> records, and the call numbers which were assigned then do not match the
> call number assigned by LC, do you now go back and re-classify to the LC
> call number (as found in the 050 field) and re-label all the bound
> volumes, or do you leave them with the call number which the journal has
> had in your library for all these years?

We never reclassify just to match LC.  When staff is available (very
rarely) we have done some projects to assign law numbers and other
newly-defined schemes.  We'd like to do something with the revised J
schedules although that's an expensive undertaking and is more likely for
books than serials.

Crystal Graham
University of California, San Diego
<cgraham@GORT.UCSD.EDU>

> Thanks - from soggy California..
>
> Kathleen Thorne
> Serials Cataloger
> San Jose State University
> kathleen@sjsuvm1.sjsu.edu