Library of Congress

Cataloging in Publication Program

The Library of Congress > Cataloging in Publication Program > CIP Cataloging FAQ

This FAQ document is intended for use by the Library of Congress CIP Partnership Program members to help facilitate the CIP cataloging workflow and to ensure the quality of catalog records.

Using PrePub Book Link

General Cataloging Questions

CIP/BIBCO Descriptive Cataloging Practices

CIP/BIBCO Practices for using Library of Congress Subject Headings and LC Classification (LCSH/LCC)

CIP/BIBCO Name Authority Practices

Back to Top

Using PrePub Book Link

What is the process for creating CIP records using PrePub Book Link?

PrePub Book Link will convert data from the CIP Request into the MARC Editor. CIP partners should verify that the information in the MARC Editor reflects what is in the galley attachment and update the data in the MARC Editor accordingly.  Then you will click on the Download Bib File button in the MARC Editor to send the record to the local cataloging client.  This process will vary depending on the cataloging client.  At this point the authorized access points should be verified or created and the subject analysis done.  You will upload the completed bibliographic record to the specific CIP data request using the Partner Cataloger MARC Upload button in the PrePub Book Link data view. Again the specific steps you follow depend on if you are using Voyager or OCLC as your cataloging client. 

Where can partners find the information about which LC Section in PrePub Book Link they should send completed CIP Requests to for end stage processing?

Please see PPBL Section Scope Summaries.

Whom should I contact if I have additional questions not covered in the FAQ?

You should contact a CIP program specialist.

Back to Top

General Cataloging Questions

Should CIP partners search for duplicates before cataloging, and, if so, which system should they search?

Yes. CIP partners who are OCLC utility members should search in OCLC before beginning cataloging.

If a minimal level vendor record is found in OCLC, should CIP partners enhance this record?

No. Unless the piece has already been published, a new original cataloging record should be created.

If volume 1 of a work has been cataloged as a multipart item and a CIP Request for volume 2 is received, should a separate record be created?

No. Added volumes are out of scope for the CIP Program. You should return the CIP Request in PPBL by selecting Proposed Rejection from the status dropdown, adding a work note for the publisher liaison, and clicking update.

Do CIP partners provide cataloging for e-book versions?

No. If there is an e-book application associated with the CIP Request, the e-book record is created automatically by PrePub Book Link. Not even LC catalogers create bib records for CIP e-books.

In a case where LC and PCC cataloging practice differs (e.g., using conventional collective titles), should CIP partners follow LC practice because they are cataloging for LC?

In general, partner libraries should follow PCC standards when cataloging CIP records. For example, if the partner library's practice is to provide an authorized series access point, they can continue to do so, whereas LC would not.

How does PCC policy regarding ISBD punctuation, including terminal periods in MARC bibliographic records, affect records created by CIP partners?

The CIP Program will continue to require ISBD punctuation, including records created by CIP partners. PrePub Book Link depends on ISBD as part of the programming. The CIP data block also depends on it for formatting.

Back to Top

CIP/BIBCO Descriptive Cataloging Practices

When transcribing data for CIP, where should the data be taken from? Data View, galley, etc.?

PrePub Book Link will convert data from the CIP Request into the MARC Editor. CIP partners should verify that the information in the MARC Editor reflects what is in the galley attachment and update the data in the MARC Editor accordingly. 

What is the practice regarding capitalization using the MARC Editor in PrePub Book Link?

For capitalization of transcribed elements, catalogers are encouraged to follow RDA Appendix A. If the subject or language is unfamiliar, it is also permissible to "take what you see" on the resource.

In non-CIP BIBCO records, 008/39 (Cataloging source code) is coded "c" for "Cooperative cataloging programs." How should CIP records be coded?

008/39 should be coded "c."

What information should appear in the 040 field?

PrePub Book Link should automatically supply an 040$a with the partner library's MARC21 code, followed immediately by a slash (/) and DLC (e.g., 040$a [code]/DLC). The partner library's MARC21 code will appear in 040$c.

How should an ebook ISBN be recorded in the record for the print version?

ISBNs for an ebook should be recorded as 020$z.

How should subfield $q in the 020 field be applied?

CIP partners should apply these instructions for the 020$q:

  • Add qualifying information in a single set of parentheses
  • Separate multiple pieces of qualifying information by a space, semicolon, space
  • The first use of the subfield $q should be outside the opening parenthesis
  • A second use of subfield $q should appear inside the parenthesis and follow the semicolon

Examples:

020 ## $a 9780415747233 $q (v. 1 ; $q hardcover)
020 ## $a 9780415747240 $q (v. 2 ; $q hardcover)
020 ## $z 9780544974265 $q (ebook)

The CIP galley lists additional ISBNs that are not included in the Data View. Should these be recorded in the CIP record?

Yes. Additional ISBNs listed in the CIP galley should be added to the CIP record, using 020$a or 020$z as appropriate.

The data view screen shows "Edition: 1." How should this appear in the CIP record?

In general, edition statements should be recorded in the form in which they appear in the galley. Statements that only appear in the Data View generally should not be included in the CIP record.

How should the 263 field be recorded?

The 263 is automatically generated by PrePub Book Link. For example:
263## 1908--For PPD (proposed publication date) of August 2019
263## 2001--For PPD of January 2020

When the first place of publication listed on the galley is not in the United States (e.g., Cambridge, United Kingdom), what information should be recorded in the 264$a?

Take the place of publication from the galley.  If the first place is not in the U.S, also record the first U.S. place of publication in a second 264$a.

If it is clear from the galley that only the copyright date will appear in the published item, LC prefers to use that date in brackets as the inferred date of publication (e.g., [2019]). In case of doubt, use the date in the PubYr.

If there isn't a publication or copyright date listed in the galley, what information should be recorded in the 264$c?

Take the date of publication from the PubYr.

How should the 300 field be recorded?

For a single volume monograph use: pages cm(.). For a multipart item use: volumes cm(.).

What do CIP partners record in the 300 field if there is an indication of illustrations?

Do not record illustrations in the 300 field or the 008 at the galley stage. This information will be added when the book is received for CIP verification.

For CIP records, should the 300 field end with a period when there is a series statement?

Put a period after the cm if there is a series statement present in the record (i.e., "pages cm."). If there is no series statement, record "pages cm" without the period. See LC-PCC PS 1.7.1 on Punctuation at the End of MARC Fields 245, 246-247, 250, 264, 300, 310/321, 362, 490. CIP cataloging applies the same instructions.

Our library doesn't establish series authorized access points. How should we record the series statement in the CIP record if the series has been established by another library?

Record the series statement as 490 0.

If there is a series statement listed on the Data View but the information does not appear in the galley, should the series statement be included in the CIP record?

No. If a series statement appears only on the Data View, do not include this information in the CIP record.

How should the summary provided in the Data View be recorded?

PrePub Book Link will automatically supply the publisher-supplied summary from the CIP Request in the 520 field in the MARC Editor. For example:
520## "Is it rainy? Cloudy? Stormy? Readers will learn the ins and outs of observing weather conditions in this book"-- $c Provided by publisher.

How should the presence of indexes and/or bibliographical references be recorded?

PrePub Book Link will automatically supply the 504/500 fields in the MARC Editor based on the information supplied by the publisher in the CIP Request.
This information should be recorded as follows:
500 Includes index.
504 Includes bibliographical references.
504 Includes bibliographical references and index.
Note: Make sure to verify the appropriate information in the 008/24 (bib refs) and 008/31 (index).

How do CIP partner libraries determine when it is appropriate to include a TOC note in 505 field for an ECIP record?

Apply the following guidelines summarized from LC DCM D8.9.2.2:
1. Key word searching – Does adding the chapter titles to the record provide improved natural language key word searching?
2. Understanding of the contents – Does adding the chapter titles to the record provide a greater understanding of the contents of the item than what is conveyed in the title and statement of responsibility area?
3. Degree of editing - Will the TOC data require extensive manual editing to prepare it for machine manipulation?
4. Long TOC with many entries - If the TOC is long and contains many entries, does this dilute the value of the information once it is put into a 505 field? Exclude elements such as "Preface," "Acknowledgments," "Index," and "Bibliography."

How should the 776 field be recorded?

In the Legacy system the 776 field for the associated ebook was added to the print record after the Dewey was completed and the data view returned to CIP. In PPBL the 776 field is included in the print record when it is downloaded to the cataloging client. What this means for CIP partners is that while changes made in the MARC Editor will be reflected in the 776 field, changes made to the 100, 245a, 250, or 264 fields in the cataloging client may also need to be updated manually in the 776 field.

Punctuation:

Input a period following subfield “a” (except following an open date) and subfield “t” (when followed by subfield “b”).

Do not input a period at the end of any other subfield.

Example:

100 1# ‡a Braun, Eric,‡d 1971- ‡e author. – Date added
245 14 ‡a The imaginative explorer's guide to the mall / ‡c by Eric Braun.
264 #1 ‡a Mankato, Minnesota : ‡b Black Rabbit Books, ‡c 2021. – State added
776 08 ‡i Online version: ‡a Braun, Eric, 1971- ‡t Imaginative explorer's guide to the mall ‡d Mankato, Minnesota : Black Rabbit Books, 2021 ‡z 9781623104238 ‡w (DLC) 2019026700 – Date and state added. Initial article dropped.

More detailed information on the 776 field can be found in Cataloger’s Desktop in the MARC 21 Format for Bibliographic Data and the CONSER Editing Guide.

CIP partners can use judgement about making minor changes to punctuation.

Back to Top

CIP/BIBCO Practices for using Library of Congress Subject Headings and LC Classification (LCSH/LCC)

Should CIP partners do full subject cataloging instead of sending the record to LC to complete assigning subject headings and LC classification number?

CIP partners do full cataloging. Most CIP partners supply LC Classification, and LC adds the Dewey number. Northwestern University and GPO add the Dewey number in addition to LC Classification. GPO also assigns SUDOCS numbers to their CIP records. Queens Library assigns only Dewey Classification, and LC catalogers supply the LCC for these records.

Should ECIP records include geographic area codes?

Yes. Geographic area codes should be assigned in an 043 field in accordance with Subject Headings Manual Appendix E.

According to the BPM (BIBCO Participants' Manual), BIBCO libraries use 050_4 to indicate that the call number was assigned by a PCC library. How should the 050 be coded in CIP records?

The call number should be coded 050 00.

Should CIP partners complete the shelflisting in the 050$b?

No. LC staff will complete the shelflisting by adding the Cutter number and date in the 050$b.

What should CIP partners do about classifications by place or corporate body that are extended into the second Cutter?

In the case when the second Cutter is needed, CIP partners should extend the call number into the second Cutter to ensure that the shelflisting is completed correctly. For example, 050 00 HT243.U62 $b N7+ would alert LC cataloging technicians to add a digit for the main entry to complete the shelflisting.

Where can CIP partners who are SACO members find instructions for submitting CIP-related Subject and Classification Proposals?

Instructions for submitting CIP-related Subject and Classification Proposals can be found here.

Back to Top

CIP/BIBCO Name Authority Practices

When creating a name authority record, how do we cite information found in a CIP in the 670 field?

You should cite as:
670 ## [Title, Date]: $b CIP title page (…) data view (…)
It is only necessary to cite the name from the Data View if the form differs from that on the title page galley.

Back to Top