Workshop on Films and Videorecordings
Cataloging
Thursday, March 31,
Trainer: Peter H. Lisius
Music and Media Catalog Librarian
Assistant Professor
I.
Training
Materials:
II.
Questions
and Answers
Basic Section:
Q1. Should subfield(s) in 041 follow the alphabetical
order, such as example in slide 38, should subfield “$j eng” be after subfield
“$h spa”
A1. Subfields in MARC records are not generally intended to be input in alphabetical order. See details in OLAC Newsletters: Cataloger’s Judgment: Q&A, compiled by Jay Weitz (http://olacinc.org/drupal/newsletters/enews/2010June/judgement.html)
Follow-up response from Shi Deng: Jay Weitz’s Cataloger’s Judgment: Q&A can be keyword searchable at: http://olacinc.org/drupal/?q=node/59
Q2. If an English parallel title is seen on disc, can it be added to 245 [$b]?
(Question asked at the time with slide 46)
A2.
You would start with chief source. AACR2
says item itself and its container (and container label) if the container is an
integral part of the piece (7.0B1). So yes, if an English title appears on chief source
of information, e.g., the title frames, a disc, [with the title proper]; no, if
an English title appears only on disc [as not taken from title frame with title
proper], use 246 to trace the English title.
Q3. Which field do we choose to record participants/performers and creation/
production credits? 511 or 508 field?
A3. Creation is different from performance. 511 records credits for these who PARTICIPATE in a film, while 508 records credits for these who CREATE and/or PRODUCE a film and not recorded in 245c.
Q4. Question on 245 $c punctuation as practice
convention, usually not put comma between credit and name when it is not on the
piece, i.e. “dao yan Lu Xuechang”(CJK practice
convention) vs. “dao
yan, Lu Xuechang” (slide
51, 63, etc.) (Originally asked by Sarah Elman, brought it up by Peter Lisius)
A4. For English DVDs and other Western languages
that I catalog, I've always added commas when it made sense grammatically to do
so. Then asked audience what they think.
Shi responded that at UCSD, for original cataloging, we follow CJK practice convention most of time unless a person with multiple credits/different responsibilities, three or more, we would use comma to break them to make sense grammatically, i.e.” zhi pian, she ying, bian ju, dao yan, Lu Xuechang (制片, 摄影, 编剧, 导演, 路学长),” not “zhi pian she ying bian ju dao yan Lu Xuechang.”
Q5. Morimoto pointed out a couple errors in
246 of the 4th example of slide 61: missing space after Hotel M;
missing “$b”; “Gangster” should be lower case.
A5. Before correction: $i Title known as in English: $a Hotel M: Gangster's Last Draw
After correction: $i Title known as in English: $a Hotel M : $b gangster's Last Draw
Q6. I have seen a lot catalog records record original release date
for DVD in 260c, what’s your practice?
A6. It is OK if date is the same as original release date. However, if not, prefer to add original release date in 500 field to avoid confusion.
Q7. If a copy found matching, credits on
screen in CJK, but recorded as English probably taken from container, what you
would do?
A7. If you are pretty sure about it, enhance the record by adding CJK scripts, if not, create new record.
Q8. Publication date with DVD that has
special feature: What about single DVD that has special feature?
A8. Treat
it the same as DVD with special feature on bonus DVD.
Q9. As to the second example of slide 97: why coding
single date in DtSt of fixed field in this case?
A9. In
this case, special features are included. (Referring to OCLC
master record: 150881728. This record indicates that multiple special
features are included in the DVD version.)
Q10. If a motion picture is based on an original drama/novel by an author, where do we
record the original author? In 245 $c? ?
A10. Yes, if the original author appears on the chief source of information.
Q11. Do we still emphasize “title from …”
note?
A11. Yes, we should, if not from chief source.
Q12. Is it a standard practice to provide
summary in CJK language in quotation marks in 520 field?
(See also example and question in slide 102)
A12. Hideyuki Morimoto’s answer is yes, according to Descriptive Cataloging of East Asian Material: CJK Examples of AACR2 and LCRIs, 7.7B17 Summary.
Q13. If [language] subtitles are added to a
DVD, do we create a new record?
A13. Yes, adding [language] subtitles is considered a significant difference from other versions.
Advanced
Section
Q1. What
is a reasonable cataloguing quota of videorecordings?
A1. It is difficult to come up with such a number, especially at academic
libraries, where cataloguers are expected to perform other additional duties
than hands-on cataloguing. Maybe, it is within the range of 10-20 original
cataloguing bibliographic records per day, accompanied by processing of
necessary supporting authority records, for videorecordings.
Q2. What is the difference between
genre/form headings 155 and form subdivisions 185?
A2. The trainer reviewed Advanced Section, Slide #4.
Q3. Genre/form headings may not
geographically be subdivided. Isn't it the case? How may such a
geographical aspect of a videorecording be indicated?
A3.1. Genre/form headings may not geographically be subdivided.
A3.2. It is LC's policy for the time being. In the meanwhile, some
libraries code bibliographic field 655 entries as local and geographically
subdivide genre/form headings, when deemed appropriate.
Q4. When a name of a corporate body
is "... Films", is such a name alone considered to convey the idea of
a corporate body or is it necessary to add a qualifier "
(Firm)" in the heading, as per AACR2, 24.4B1?
A4. The trainer tends to think "... Films" alone conveys the
idea of a corporate body and usually proceeds as such. However, when
various cases of this type are checked in the LC/NACO Authority File, mixed
practice is apparent.
Q5.1. Advance Section, Slide #57
(excerpt from a bibliographic record): The uniform title under field 130
and the title proper under field 245 are identical. In this case, is uniform
title necessary under bibliographic field 130?
Q5.2. Should the uniform title under field 130
rather receive a qualifier in subfield "a"?
Q5.3. However, exact match authority record,
LCCN no2010061721, does not carry any qualifier for this uniform title.
A5: The trainer will investigate this case and will let workshop
participants know his findings. [Below is the trainer’s follow-up answer via
e-mail:
**No, it isn’t necessary to add to the bibliographic record. They are identical, as you note above. I had originally added this example because there was an authority record for the series in the NAF. In Question 5.3, the question was why the same basic title for “Ethical markets” did not have the qualifier “Television program.” This heading was established by me. When I set this heading up, there were no “conflicting resources” making it necessary to qualify the heading by “television program.” But, there was another title by which this series is known, “Ethical markets TV series,” and it is included as 430 reference on this particular NAR. If the program had not been known by a different title, I wouldn’t have established the heading.]
Additional question about
whether it's necessary to add the uniform title (with qualifier) to the record
for the original work.
Trainer: When cataloging motion pictures, I always
search the NAF for a uniform title. If I find one, I always add it to the
bibliographic record. I usually assume that a previously-existing
conflict prompted the heading’s creation, making it a good idea to add the
uniform title each time a heading is found.
Q6: When
a uniform title is established in the LC/NACO Authority File for use under
bibliographic field 630 as a subject of a resource on a motion picture, should
a pre-existing bibliographic record for the motion picture itself be revised
for addition of the uniform title under field 130?
A6: It is PCC practice to do so.
Q7: Is it a requirement to enter
relater codes?
A7: No, it is not mandatory.
Q8: Should uniform titles
separately be established for different videorecording systems, such as VHS,
DVD, and Blu-ray?
A8: No, VHS, DVD, and Blue-ray are still of the same format,
videorecording. Separate uniform titles are established for different
resources.
Q9: For
establishment of separate uniform titles, when it is said they are established
for different resources, do different resources mean different contents?
A9: Yes.
Q10: In the following pre-existing
name authority record:
010
no2010182385
040 IlMchBWI |b eng |c IlMchBWI
130 0 Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya (Television
program)
430 0 Suzumiya Haruhi
no yu(macron)utsu
(Television program)
670 The
melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya.
Complete collection
[VR], 2006.
670 IMDb,
television series; original air date
Why is the established heading an
English translation title and the cross-reference a
Japanese original title? As more or less explained under 670-2 above,
Japanese original
Suzumiya Haruhi no yu(macron)utsu was first televised, Apr.-July 2006, then translated
into English and localized for the North American market for release, May-Nov.
2007. So,
the Japanese and English versions were *not* simultaneously made.
Also, the cataloger
who established this name authority record did have both the English
translation and
Japanese original titles. Is LCRI, 25.3A for the named individual works of
art applied
to television programs?
A10: This name authority record is in error. The Japanese original
title should be the main part of the established heading.
Q11: Then, may fields 130 and 430
be switched in this name authority record for update registration in the
LC/NACO Authority File?
A11: Yes, if one is authorized to make changes to name authority records
in the LC/NACO Authority File.
Q12: A DVD was originally
published with no series title. Then, the same DVD was re-packaged,
together with other DVDs, with a series title on a box. Is a new
bibliographic record permitted for the re-packaged DVD?
A12: When there is no major difference, and when there is no accompanying
material added, and when there is no special feature added, no new
bibliographic record is created. Series title appearing on a re-packaged
box alone does not constitute a major difference. (If considered important,
catalogers may add additional information of the re-packaging in local
note.) An alternative approach is to create a set record for the new set so the
data elements of this re-packaged manifestation can be brought out.
Q13: As
long as the same bibliographic record is used for the original DVD and
repackaged DVD, may the series statement appearing on the box (but not in or on
DVD itself) of the later repackaged publication be added to the pre-existing
bibliographic record originally prepared for the original DVD?
A13: No.
RDA Section
Q1. Question about DVD doesn’t indicate the
year it was released, can we use conjecture date?
A1. Yes. If you know the date late than … use [20--], if sure, [date], if not sure, [date?].
Q2. How do you see the implementation of
RDA?
A2. RDA concept will truly help patron identify videos. It all started with good intention. … Latin abbreviations are acceptable internationally, but now we go down to the level without them. … MARC is old format, we need new thing that definitely work well with RDA. I don’t want RDA to die, it’s a new standard in progress.
Q3. How much of your workshop slides can be
shared?
A3. Don’t mind to share, but will do some tweak before put on CEAL web site, maybe by the end of April.