(1)
Date:         Wed, 25 Oct 1995 12:08:11 PDT
From: kathleen thorne <KATHLEEN@SJSUVM1.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Records for Different Formats (Ed Kownslar)

In reply to Ed Kownslar re paper/microform holdings on records:

We have somewhere around 16,000 serial records here at San Jose State
University, and somewhere over 4,000 current subscriptions (at least before
we started this current year's cuts).  We have a single bibliographic
record for a title, and attach all the order records and checkin records for
that title to it (we have Innovative's INNOPAC, by the way). Our holdings
statements are part of the bibliographic record, and all formats are
given on the single bibliographic record.  It's easiest for the patrons that
way, since they find the single record (the most important part) and can
then see what vols. we have in which format -- faster and easier than jumping
from one record to another, and wondering whether the 2 or 3 titles are the
same or not and why the proliferation.  Easier too for our checkin student
assistants, as they find the single record, rather than having to look at
perhaps 2 or 3 records before they can find the record for the format they
are checking in.  Same for claiming, ordering, etc.

The rationale is that it's the TITLE that is important, not the format.

Does this make sense?

Kathleen Thorne
Serials Cataloger In Exile
San Jose State University
kathleen@sjsuvm1.sjsu.edu
----------
(2)
Date:         Wed, 25 Oct 1995 16:25:03 -0600
From: Elizabeth Boyson <alieb@GEMINI.OSCS.MONTANA.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Records for Different Format (Charles Tremper)

Our library does the same thing.

I think the access is easier for researchers. We have summary holdings
for each format.

Elizabeth Boyson                       Phone:406-994-5305
Montana State University - Bozeman     FAX:406-994-2851
Serials/Acquisitions                   Internet: alieb@montana.edu
Renne Library
Bozeman, MT 59717

> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Wed, 25 Oct 1995 16:30:55 EST
> From: CFTREMPE@hawk.syr.edu
> Subject: Re: Records for Different Formats (Ed Kownslar)
>
> Syracuse University is a NOTIS library and at the time we transferred to
> NOTIS, we made the decision to have one bibliographic record and separate
> copy statements for paper, microfilm and/or microfiche.  We are aware that
> this decision violates current cataloguing practice, but believe it helps
> our users by consolidating all holdings information on one record. For
> many popular titles we have a mixture of bound volumes and microfilm
> and/or fiche. We use the paper bibliographic record and add 533-fields
> beginning Microfilm copy: or Microfiche copy: for the descriptive data for
> the microform. We do not add |h in the 245., or add title tracings
> containing |h
>
> We do, however, maintain separate records for electronic formats.
>
> Charles Tremper
> Head, serials Unit
> Syracuse University Library
>