I have seen several comments on various email lists asking whether PCC can
"do anything" about LC's decision regarding series, so thought I would
share these recommendations which were made at the joint CONSER and BIBCO
Operations Meeting last Friday.

Renette

>X-Authentication-Warning: sun8.loc.gov: lhaw owned process doing -bs
>Date:         Mon, 1 May 2006 09:44:07 -0400
>Reply-To: CONSER Cataloging Discussion List <CONSRLST@loc.gov>
>Sender: CONSER Cataloging Discussion List <CONSRLST@loc.gov>
>X-PH: V4.4 (uchicago), $Revision: 1.70 $@mx01
>From: Les Hawkins <lhaw@loc.gov>
>Subject: Recommendations from Operations meetings
>Comments: To: pccpol@loc.gov
>Comments: cc: pcclist@loc.gov, consrlst@loc.gov, bibco@loc.gov
>To: CONSRLST@sun8.LOC.GOV
>List-Help: <http://listserv.loc.gov/cgi-bin/wa?LIST=CONSRLST>,
>            <mailto:LISTSERV@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV?body=INFO CONSRLST>
>List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:CONSRLST-unsubscribe-request@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV>
>List-Subscribe: <mailto:CONSRLST-subscribe-request@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV>
>List-Owner: <mailto:CONSRLST-request@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV>
>List-Archive: <http://listserv.loc.gov/cgi-bin/wa?LIST=CONSRLST>
>X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 mlx=0
>adultscore=0 adjust=0 reason=mlx engine=3.1.0-06042601
>definitions=3.0.0-06050102
>X-Uchicago-PMX-Id: 140.147.249.48: k41E9mqb016978 [Mon May  1 09:09:55 2006]
>X-Uchicago-Spam: Gauge=IIIIIII, Probability=7%
>X-Uchicago-Spam-Tests: Failed='__C230066_P5 0, __CT 0, __CT_TEXT_PLAIN 0,
>__HAS_MSGID 0, __MIME_TEXT_ONLY 0, __MIME_VERSION 0, __SANE_MSGID 0'
>
>The BIBCO and CONSER Operations Committees met jointly last week and voted
>to make the following recommendations to the PCC Policy Committee:
>
>The BIBCO and CONSER Operations Committees recommend to the PCC Policy
>Committee:
>
>1) That it officially communicate to the Library of Congress the concerns
>that have arisen on our email lists and in discussion at our meetings
>about LCs new series policy
>
>2) That the PCC evaluate series practices in the following areas:
>
>         1. Simplify series authority creation and documentation to support
>it. Areas that should be covered include:
>                 a. Bib maintenance
>                 b. Unambiguous distinction of strong vs weak series
>                 c.Selcted series authority control or total
>
>         2. Assess importance of series authority control
>
>         3. Cost benefit analysis of both original series control work and
> copy
>cataloging
>
>         4. Establish a discrete time frame for this evaluation process
>
>
>Les Hawkins
>CONSER Coordinator
>Library of Congress
>Washington, DC
>202 707-5185