[OPEN-ILS-DEV] Introduction and Question

[Hardy, Elaine]

Patrick,

 

The added entry was not showing up in the opac display because the MARC
record was incorrectly coded and incorrectly cataloged. In the case of
this record, it had only a passing familiarity with MARC. Unfortunately,
the PINES database is resplendent with very dreadful records that effect
how Evergreen functions. We can get together at some point and I can
regale you with all the reasons why (I don't know if you remember me - I
used to work at Newton with Carol). Basically, the problems with the
PINES catalog because of poor cataloging by libraries (prior to joining
PINES), and the number of duplicate records created as a result, make it
difficult to accurately understand and illustrate how Evergreen searches
and displays. There are also some problems with authority control in
Evergreen that also cause a few problems with searching author and
subject. My understanding is that those problems will be addressed in an
upcoming release. There are also some elements of the MARC record I, as
a cataloger want displayed in the OPAC (cast lists, for example), but I
don't have the final say in those kinds of local decisions.

 

I have merged duplicate records in this search and overlaid the records
with better OCLC records. If you do the search again, you should get a
result set that is 13 records rather than 20. For the title in question,
you should now see added entries for all people mentioned in the record
as responsible for the item.

 

Yesterday, I was busy juggling several different questions and problems
and just answered one of your basic questions and did not follow your
search. Hopefully, by cleaning up the records in the result set, some of
your questions were resolved. I gave a much too brief explanation of 700
fields. We refer to them as author fields but they are actually added
entry personal name fields. When we catalog, we create added entries for
people and entities responsible for the item we have in hand. They can
be corporations, individuals, editors, illustrators, compilers,
publishers, translators, etc. A good explanation is in OCLC's
Bibliographic formats and standards
(http://www.oclc.org/bibformats/default.htm):

 

Use fields 700-730 to provide additional access to a bibliographic
record from names and/or titles having various relationships to the item
you are cataloging. Added entries are made for persons, corporate bodies
and meetings having some form of responsibility for the creation of the
work. This includes intellectual and publishing responsibilities.
http://www.oclc.org/bibformats/en/7xx/ 

 

Added entry is a term from card catalogs - an additional card to provide
access to the title card. It is still relevant in understanding the
hierarchy of responsibility for a work. Added entries in an online
environment are additional access points to the record. The main entry
is the person or corporation with primary responsibility for the
intellectual or artistic content of the work or that shares primary
responsibility. For multiple authors, the main entry is the first author
in the list on the title page.

 

A 700 field is for personal names, 710 for corporate, etc. You can look
at the Bib formats and standards and see explanations and rules for
input for these and other MARC fields.

 

Another aspect of this particular title (Slipcover chic), based on the
record and without seeing the item - apparently it is primarily
illustrated with text subordinate to those illustrations. When this is
true of a title, the illustrator is the main entry and the author of the
text is an added entry since the person primarily responsible for the
work as a whole is the illustrator.

 

I hope this helps clarify things.

 

Elaine

 

________________________________

 

 

 

J. Elaine Hardy

Library Services Manager - Collections & Reference

Georgia Public Library Service,

A Unit of the University System of Georgia

1800 Century Place, Suite 150

Atlanta, Ga. 30345-4304

404.235-7128

404.235-7201, fax

 

ehardy at georgialibraries.org

www.georgialibraries.org

 

-----Original Message-----
From: open-ils-dev-bounces at list.georgialibraries.org
[mailto:open-ils-dev-bounces at list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of
Patrick Durusau
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 4:11 PM
To: open-ils-dev at list.georgialibraries.org
Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-DEV] Introduction and Question

 

 

 

OK, but that doesn't explain why the *displayed* record appears to be 

incoherent given the search term.

 

If the record in question had returned the content of the 700 field, as 

opposed to the 100 field for that record, the question would have never 

come up.

 

In other words, search the 700 field (I am not sure what you do about 

the illus. who was also listed when there is an author search) but 

return a *displayed* result that is meaningful in terms of the search 

request.

 

Hope you are having a great day!

 

Patrick

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://list.georgialibraries.org/pipermail/open-ils-dev/attachments/20070913/7ecb14ce/attachment-0001.html