Rosa:
  If you want to "save time and resources" you need to look at what the
most time-consuming processes in your cataloging.  In my experience, the
assignment of call numbers and subject headings are the most
time-consuming.  The rest could be considered "lower level" work.

   One way to implement this would be to NOT classify your periodicals,
and just to shelve them by title (245 $a).

   Another way to save time would be to use one bibliographic for all
versions and not maintain separate records for paper, microfilm, and
microfiche.  This depends on your local system's capabilities, of course.

  Another method is to accept online records from your bibliographic
utility on a "no-conflict" basis.  This means that you would NOT check
the headings (name/subject/series) UNLESS it conflicts with existing
headings in your online catalog.  Again, this depends on the capabilities
of your online catalog to generate reports on conflicting/new headings.

  I hope that helps.

-- Mitch

On Fri, 3 Nov 1995, rosa montana lacambra wrote:

> The Library of the Pompeu Fabra University (Barcelona, Spain) has began a
> process in order to lower its level of cataloging (and thus saving time and
> resources).
>
> In the domain of serials cataloging I have used until now AACR2 2nd level.
> I've been studying AACR2 1st level, AACR2 1st level augmented and CONSER.
> Right now, I feel confused.
>
> I would appreciate guidance, counsel (and more information) in some matters.
> Please excuse me if some of my questions sound too obvious to US serials
> catalogers, but I'm a librarian from another country. These are the
> questions:
>
> 1. Which is the usual cataloging level for serials in US University Libra-
> ries AACR2 1st level, 1st level augmented, 2nd level, CONSER level or others.
>
> 2. Do you use exactly the same level for both serials and monographs,
> different levels or the same but with some differences.
>
> 3. I would like to know if some libraries have lowered their level recently.
> Can you tell me about the results, especially related to satisfaction of
> patrons and good retrieval of information?
>
> 4. I would be especially interested about which information you include in
> 245 and 260 fields.
>
> 5. About notes , I would like to know which ones are considered mandatory,
> which ones not and which ones "it depends on ...":
>         1. Linking notes.
>         2. Frequency notes.
>         3. "Description based on" note.
>         4. Numbering peculiarities.
>         5. Title variations.
>         6. Supplements.
>         7. Issuing bodies.
>         8. Indexes.
>         9. Language/s.
>         10. Contents.
>         11. Others.
>
> Please respond directly to me (e-mail: montanya@upf.es) or to the list if
> you consider the answer could be of general interest.
>
> Thanks in advance (and forgive me for my poor English).
>
> Rosa Montanya
>
> Pompeu Fabra University. Library. Cataloging Department.
>

  _^_                                                 _^_
( ___ )-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-( ___ )
 |   |                                               |   |
 |   |     Mitch Turitz, Serials Librarian           |   |
 |   |     San Francisco State University Library    |   |
 |   |     Internet: turitz@sfsu.edu                 |   |
 |   |                                               |   |
( ___ )-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=-=-==-( ___ )
   V                                                   V

"Before the beginning of great brillance, there must be chaos.
     Before a brilliant person begins something great,
           they must look foolish to the crowd."
                    -- from the I Ching