2 messages, 107 lines:
(1)---------------------------
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 1996 15:29:54 -0600
From: "Kevin M. Randall" <kmr@NWU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Local holdings for incomplete run
At 02:26 PM 1/8/96 EST, Jean Gorman wrote:
>Situation: You are updating a bib. record for a serial that has
>ceased publication. Your library does not have the full run.
>
>1. Do you note your library's holdings in the bib. record or the
>check-in/holdings record?
At Northwestern University (using the NOTIS system), we record the
holdings in a MARC holdings record, which is linked to the bib
record and displays in the OPAC. We currently use (or at least
attempt to use; it's trickier than we expected...) the ANSI Z39.44
standard for this information.
>2. If using the bib., do you use the 300 field, the 362 field, or
>both? Please give an example.
The only field in the bib record that is used to give any details
about local holdings is field 590, for local notes; this gives
information specific to our holdings (e.g., library has reprint
copy of some vols., library does not subscribe to the supplements,
etc.) Fields 300 and 362 pertain to the publication itself, not
to the library's holdings. When a publication ceases, we do
"close out" the 300 and 362, if the information is available,
whether or not we hold the volumes; we follow AACR2 in recording
this information.
>3. If you've bound your volumes other than one physical volume per
>discrete volume, do you note it? How? Another example would be
>great.
We create an individual item record for each physical piece; the
listing of item records in our system is our record of binding
practices. For our standard of giving information in item
records, we sort of borrow freely from the ANSI holdings standard.
For example, here is the last screen of our listing of item
records for NEWSWEEK:
LTNU DONE AAK0575
NOTIS ITEM SUMMARY LU00
NU SERL LC 35009615 //r43 ISSN 0028-9604 S/STAT c FREQ w S/T p CFR 52/2/4
Newsweek. v. 1- Feb. 17, 1933- -- Washington <etc.> Newsweek, Inc., etc.
=>001 STATUS: 2D LOCN: MAIN periodicals room COPY:
CALL: |b L051;N558 |v v. ITEMS: 64
0055 v.123:no.18-26 (1994:May-June)
0056 v.124:no.1-9 (1994:July-Aug.)
0057 v.124:no.10-18 (1994:Sept.-Oct.)
0058 v.124:no.19-v.125:no.1 (1994:Nov.-1995:Jan. 2)
0059 v.125:no.2-9 (1995:Jan.9-Feb.)
0060 v.125:no.10-17 (1995:Mar.-Apr.)
0061 v.125:no.18-26 (1995:May-June)
0062 v.126:no.1-9 (1995:July-Aug.)
0063 v.126:no.10-18 (1995:Sept.-Oct.)
C 0064 v.126:no.19-v.127:no.1 (1995:Nov.-1996:Jan.1)
Here, we can see that we usually bind approximately nine issues
together.
Kevin M. Randall
Head, Serials Cataloging Section
Northwestern University Library
Evanston, IL 60208-2300
internet: kmr@nwu.edu
phone: (708) 491-2939
fax: (708) 491-7637
(2)------------------------
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 1996 14:22:12 CST
From: Patricia Sayre McCoy <psm1@MIDWAY.UCHICAGO.EDU>
Subject: Re: Local holdings for incomplete run
Jean,
The bib. record fields 260 and/or 362 are not the place to
record local holdings. Actually, AACR2 doesn't address holdings
recording at all. That is what the holdings format is for. In our
library, we prefer positive holdings, so we would record incomplete
runs as follows:
866(1) 40#80#av.1-5,6,8-20
or, if many holdings are missing or the display is too complicated:
866(1) 40#80#a.v1-98#zLibrary lacks v.2,18,35,37,41,50
Since the 866 field is not an inventory but rather a record of holdings, we
do not record how the pieces are bound. The only exception we would make is
if we bound cumulative indexes with a certain volume or an individual vol.
was bound with a different title (not including title changes if the call
number doesn't change). I hope this helps you. If you need more details,
please feel free to ask me.
We are automated in our own local system for serials checkin and will
be bringing up our new serials system, Horizon from Ameritech, in the
spring of 1996.
Patricia Sayre McCoy Cataloging Supervisor
p-mccoy@uchicago.edu D'Angelo Law Library
uclpsm1@uchimvs1 (Bitnet) University of Chicago
