Date: Wed, 8 Sep 1993 09:05:36 MST-0700
From: Vicki Milam <MILAM_V@FRANGO.HSC.COLORADO.EDU>
Subject: RE: 212 field (Thomas Sanders)

    Whether or not the 212 abbreviation is the same as that
used by indexing tools depends entirely on the indexing
tool in question.  Since we are a medical library, our
patrons depend on MedLine to a great extent.  We added a
246 to carry the NLM abbreviation so patrons could directly
search the abbreviation in our PAC.  Maybe not a legitimate
use of the 246, but patrons' needs come first.
     Vicki
     Vicki Milam (303/270-6447) Denison Library
     University of Colorado Health Sciences Center
     milam_v@frango.hsc.colorado.edu
_______________________________________

Date: 08 Sep 1993 08:12:23 -0800 (PST)
From: Anne Lobe <lobe@WLN.COM>
Subject: RE: 212 field (Thomas Sanders)

It should be the entry under which the serial appears in the catalog.  Depending
upon the catalog entry, it would be one of the following: the titile proper, the
main entry name heading and title proper, the maine entry name heading/ uniform
title, main entry name heading/uniform title/title proper, main entry uniform
title headining, or main entry uniform title heading/title proper. Anne Lobe/
Serials Review, WLN

________________________________________

Date: 08 Sep 1993 11:32:08 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Julia C. Blixrud" <jblix@CNI.ORG>
Subject: RE: 212 field (Thomas Sanders)

Ten years ago, the CONSER Abstracting & Indexing Coverage Project tried
to do just what you are asking for.  As a by-product for adding information
on where journals are indexed or abstracted (the 510 field in CONSER MARC-
Serial records), we provided secondary services with verified bibliographic
information for the titles they covered.  That data included the 210 field
(not 212) which is the key title field (222) abbreviated according to
International Standard ISO-4, the standard used by the
international ISSN centers.

We hoped the secondary services would take advantage of that
data and include it in their own systems.  Some did, especially those
in science and technology (e.g., Chemical Abstracts Service and
Biological Abstracts) who had also been using that standard.  Others,
particularly those with long established print products, were happy
with their own abbreviations and we in the project hoped that at least
they would add ISSN to their internal serials file for future matching
purposes.  I believe some of the problems with the use of ISO-4
abbreviations were that they were not short enough.  That can be
argued (and has been), but there is a difference in creating unique
abbreviations for a file of 600 periodicals versus a file of over
600,000 titles and the standard tries to address the latter.

I believe there are systems that index the 210 and I hope some of
them will comment on its usefulness.

The National Serials Data Program continues to work with abstracting
and indexing services to both add their coverage information to the
CONSER database and to provide the services with standardized data.
Whether the services make use of the data is up to them.

It certainly would simplify the users searching if they could search
abbreviations online.  All interlibrary loan staff will agree that
most users are not successful in extrapolating titles from their
abbreviations.  Perhaps your encouragement to the services to use
international standards would help to answer your question:  can we
trust the abbrevations?  The current short answer is:  sometimes.

--

   Julia C. Blixrud, Program Officer
        and former CONSER A&I Coverage Project Manager
   Council on Library Resources
   1400 16th Street, N.W., Suite 510
   Washington, D.C.   20036-2217
   Internet:  jblix@cni.org
     (202) 483-7474