The PCC Task Group on Name Versus Subject Authorities was established to re-examine and recommend policies for content designation and formulation of headings for entities with characteristics common to both names and subjects, especially works of art, events, and geographic areas, with the goal of regularizing practices between LCSH and AACR 2 and among the variant practices of members of the cataloging community. Below are the recommendations of the task group as they were submitted to the PCC on August 4.Subject or Name Heading
1. Works of art. The Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules are being adopted more and more by the museum and archival communities. The task group agreed that intellectually there is little, if any, difference between a uniform title for a work of art and uniform titles for materials more traditionally collected and cataloged by the library community, e.g., books, serials, and music.
Recommendation. The task group recommends that uniform titles for individual works of art should reside in the name authority file and be established according to established rules and guidelines. Furthermore, the task group recommends that the art library community develop guidelines for the treatment of individual works of art within the principles of AACR 2. Until such time as ARLIS/NA makes its recommendations and guidelines are agreed, no change should be made in current practice.
2. Cemeteries, City Sections, Concentration Camps, Country Clubs. These four types of entities are all that remain in Group 3 (established in either the name or subject authority file) on the list of headings for certain entities (Descriptive Cataloging Manual, Z11, and Subject Cataloging Manual: Subject Headings, H405).
Recommendation. The task group recommends that these entities be established in the name authority file. This recommendation stems from the use of at least some of these headings as main or added, as well as subject entries. For consistency, all such headings, rather than a selection, should reside in the name authority file. The task group further recommends that these shifts be done as a project, insofar as is practicable. Doing them as a project would lead to less confusion among users.
3. Events. The task group agreed that there are two types of events. Some events are formally convened, directed toward a common goal, capable of being reconvened, and have formal names, locations, dates, and durations that can be determined in advance of the event. Other events generally cannot be repeated and have no formal name but are commonly referred to by generic terms only; more formal names may be applied to the event only after the fact.
Recommendation. The task group recommends that events that are formally convened, directed toward a common goal, capable of being reconvened, and have formal names, locations, dates, and durations that can be determined in advance of the event be established in the name authority file under AACR 2 conventions. Events that generally cannot be repeated and have no formal name but are commonly referred to by generic terms only should continue to be established in the subject authority file under LCSH conventions. The task group further recommends that these changes be done as a series of projects.MARC Tags
4. "Geographic" entities. There is a discrepancy among the three national libraries in the tagging of certain entities that have geographic extent. The British Library and the National Library of Canada tag these entities as X10 while the Library of Congress tags them as X51 (X10 1- when used as main or added entry headings).
Recommendation. The task group recommends tagging practice in accord with the following table:
Airports City sections
Arboretums Collective settlements
Botanical gardens Communes
Cemeteries Military installations
5. Families, Clans, etc. Recommendation. Because family names are widely used as main or added entry headings for collections of manuscript material, the task group recommends that the tag used for family names, clans, etc., continue to be 100. (See also the statement on family names in Cataloging Service Bulletin, no. 69, p. 38.)
6. Buildings Recommendation. The task group is not making a recommendation on this topic. Since ARLIS/NA is deliberating how to handle buildings (e.g., latest versus successive entry), perhaps this question could be revisited once ARLIS/NA has submitted any recommendations.
7. Other categories. There are additional categories of headings (e.g., fictional characters, parks, "proper" names) about which the task group has received comment but on which it is not making recommendations for reasons of insufficient support for change (fictional characters, "proper" names) or insufficient time to consider the matter within the timeframe given the task group (parks).
The Executive Council of the PCC is pleased to announce the inauguration of BIBCO, the newest component of the program. Libraries participating in BIBCO will contribute bibliographic records to the national databases for use by PCC members and other libraries. This effort will mark the first wide-scale implementation of the core record standards developed by the PCC.
During this initial phase of the program the PCC Standing Committee on Training selected twelve experienced NACO catalogers to serve as BIBCO trainers. These trainers will provide BIBCO training to staff at their home institutions and then to other PCC libraries as they join BIBCO. LC will host the first "Training the BIBCO Trainer" course on September 20-23, 1995. Penny Mattern, OCLC, and Susan Jurow, ARL, will serve as the primary instructors for the course. The Library of Congress, the Council on Library Resources, and the Research Libraries Group have provided funding for the course.
It is the mission of the PCC to provide access to libraries' collections by increasing the availability of records created under mutually acceptable standards. BIBCO participants will produce cataloging data that is widely available for use and sharing by libraries in a cost effective manner.
The first group selected to serve as BIBCO trainers is listed below. LC's Cooperative Cataloging Team extends its congratulations to them and wishes them great success in this important endeavor.Hiroko Aikawa, Cleveland Public Library
The Library of Congress, which serves as secretariat for the recently founded Program for Cooperative Cataloging, has expanded operations internationally this past year. As a result, projects have been initiated or expanded with institutions in Australia, Canada, Ireland, Italy, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom.
In the UK, the major participant in the PCC's name authority component, known as NACO, continues to be the British Library (BL). For the period January 1994-May 1995, BL has submitted records for 5,367 personal name headings, and these records have not only been incorporated into LC's database but also made widely available through the Cataloging Distribution Service. In recent months, LC and BL have engaged in development of a common cataloging policy for application of AACR 2 in order to provide a basis for expanding BL's contribution to NACO, an expansion tied to the installation of BL's new automated system projected for late 1996. The British Library also re-introduced in January 1995 the Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) as an integral feature of the records produced for the British National Bibliography. As a result of this application, BL has also been submitting proposals for new or changed headings to LCSH to enrich the subject heading list to include topics for which BL has unique perspective and expertise.
Also contributing proposed subject headings for LCSH from the British Isles are Cambridge University, Oxford University, and Trinity College, Dublin. Oxford has also sent staff to LC for a 3-day NACO training session.
The National Library of Canada (NLC) initiated its contribution of subject proposals to LCSH in October 1994 and has been forwarding records since. In addition, NLC implemented a new system in June 1995; this development will establish a basis for expanding cooperative cataloging programs to include name authority records which will likely be submitted electronically. NLC and LC are also taking this as an opportunity to ensure common cataloging policies.
As a result of their desire to cooperate more extensively in the creation of both authority and bibliographic records, BL, LC, and NLC are also engaged in an intensive review of their MARC formats to align applications to the fullest extent possible in order to avoid or minimize the need for conversion programs as data are exchanged. A meeting is projected for December 1995 to discuss and resolve issues in this area.
Meanwhile, a representative from the University of Newcastle (N.S.W.), Australia, visited the Library of Congress in April and received NACO training. He has successfully contributed 50 headings to the name authority file since that time. This arrangement is seen by both participants as temporary and exploratory, pending reprogramming of the Australian Bibliographic Network; once the National Library has installed its new automated system, discussions will ensue to expand the project with Newcastle to other institutions from Australia.
The National Library of New Zealand has for several years contributed subject headings proposals to LCSH. This year, the editor of the New Zealand National Bibliography has contacted LC about starting a project of name contributions in expectation of bringing up a new database next year. Both parties are hopeful that cost-effective arrangements to enable this expansion to occur can be worked out in the interim.
Another PCC project commenced with the American Academy in Rome. In April the academy sent to LC a staff member who has begun to submit proposals to LCSH after completion of a one-day tutorial. It is anticipated that this project will expand to include the membership of the Union of Scholarly Libraries in Rome. Meanwhile, the Swedish Institute of Classical Studies in Rome continued to contribute subject heading proposals.
The Library of Congress expects to finish its system development work for the final (1995) phase of MARC Format Integration by March 1, 1996. After receiving training, LC catalogers will begin using the new fields and data elements as early as March 1996.
Format Integration Phase 1995 includes changes to the Leader through the 00X (fixed length data fields) that were approved as a result of the Format Integration proposals in 1988. In addition, other changes to this area approved since 1992 and all the changes to fields 010-8XX (variable length data fields) approved at the June 1994 and February 1995 meetings of the USMARC Advisory Group will also be included. For background information on Format Integration see Format Integration and its Effect on the USMARC Bibliographic Format (1995).
The changes for this phase are specified in detail in Update No. 1 (1995) to the USMARC Format for Bibliographic Data (1994). A summary of the changes is found in Appendix F of that Update. Users can access an electronic version of the summary under the name "Format Integration 1995 Change List" through the following URL: gopher://marvel.loc.gov/00/.listarch/usmarc/ufbdfi95.chaQuestions regarding format integration can be directed to: Sally H. McCallum Library of Congress Network Development and MARC Standards Office Washington, DC 20540-4102 Telephone: (202) 707-6237 FAX: (202) 707-0119 Internet: email@example.com
The publications named above are available from the Library of Congress Cataloging Distribution Service (CDS). CDS will make a test file containing records coded with the new format integration conventions available via ftp at no charge in November or December of 1995. At that time its availability will be announced on the USMARC Forum (listserv) and by a notice to CDS' customers. For further information on the MARC Distribution Services of the Library of Congress, contact:Library of Congress Cataloging Distribution Service Customer Services Section Washington, DC 20541-5017 Telephone: (202) 707-6100 FAX: (202) 707-1334 Internet: firstname.lastname@example.org
A committee has been established to organize LC efforts to develop a Standard Generalized Markup Language (SGML) Document Type Definition (DTD) for the MARC record. This would provide a mapping of MARC to SGML according to the appropriate international standards that govern both types of data structure. A number of other organizations and agencies have asked the Network Development/MARC Standards Office (Net Dev/MSO) for guidance in undertaking such mapping. The committee's charge is to make choices among options for the characteristics of a draft DTD for the MARC record and to attempt to insure that such a draft would reflect any particular concerns of the Library.
With Sally McCallum, chief of Net Dev/MSO, as chair, the committee has met several times and has discussed the need for such a markup, committee members' interests in it, and with the contributions of Randy Barry of Net Dev/MSO particularly, has started to examine and discuss several approaches to a DTD.
LC CATALOGING NEWSLINE (ISSN 1066-8829) is published at least quarterly by the Cataloging Directorate, Collections Services, Library of Congress, and contains news of cataloging activities throughout the Library of Congress. Editorial Office: Cataloging Policy and Support Office, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C. 20540-4305. Editor, Robert M. Hiatt; Editorial Advisory Group: John Byrum, Roselyne Chang, Rebecca Guenther, Angela Kinney, Albert Kohlmeier, John Mitchell, Susan Morris, Geraldine Ostrove, Regina Reynolds, David Smith, Richard Thaxter, Susan Toulmin, and David Williamson. Address editorial inquiries to the editor at the above address or email@example.com (eMail), (202) 707-5831 (voice), or (202)707-6629 (fax). Listowner: David Williamson. Address subscription inquiries to the listowner at firstname.lastname@example.org.
LC CATALOGING NEWSLINE is available in electronic form only and is free of charge. To subscribe, send a mail message to email@example.com with the text: subscribe lccn [firstname lastname]. Back issues of LCCN are available through the listserver. To find out what is available, send a mail message to firstname.lastname@example.org with the text: index lccn. To get a specific file, send a mail message to email@example.com with the text: get lccn [filename].
All materials in the newsletter are in the public domain and may be reproduced, reprinted, and/or redistributed as desired. Citation to the source is requested.