Subject Authority Control and
Cooperative Cataloging
May 18, 2005
1
Overview


Subject Authority Control: Maintenance at
the Micro Level
Cooperative Cataloging: Maintenance at
the Macro Level
2
The Need for Subject Authority
Maintenance


Subject headings are dynamic!
Terminology changes over time




Afro-Americans  African Americans
Moldavian S.S.R.  Moldova
Internet (Computer network)  Internet
Chung, Tzu-ch'i (Legendary character) 
Zhong, Ziqi (Legendary character)
3
The Need for Subject Authority
Maintenance (cont.)

Add or delete subject authority records
when:



Subject access fields in bibliographic records
are modified
New bibliographic records are added to a
catalog
Bibliographic records are deleted from a
catalog
4
Providing Authority Maintenance
Locally

Incorporate authority work into cataloging
routine before downloading each record


Check each subject heading in the local or
national authority file
All cataloging staff need training on authority
control procedures
5
Providing Authority Maintenance
Locally (cont.)

Use authority modules of ILS postcataloging

Example: Innovative Interfaces’ module
“First-time use” headings
 Unauthorized heading matches
 Blind headings


Amount of maintenance performed
depends on staff time
6
Outsourcing Authority
Maintenance



4-5 authority control companies in the
United States
For a per-record fee, will match all
controlled access points in the catalog to
their authority file (names, series, subjects)
Also will correct indicators, fields,
subfields
7
Outsourcing Authority
Maintenance (cont.)

Retain a copy of your catalog



Periodically match against updated authority
file
Notify you of changed authority records with
option to purchase records or download
yourself
Periodically, you send new bibliographic
records to company for authority
processing
8
Cooperative Cataloging:
Maintenance at the Macro Level



Maintenance of the National Authority File
Need for a mechanism for creation and
revision of subject authority records
Up until ca. 1990, the Library of Congress
was solely responsible for creation and
revision of subject authority records
9
Program for Cooperative
Cataloging (PCC)



Mid-1990s: need for greater participation of
catalogers in authority activities
LC and other US libraries created PCC to provide
training, certification, and oversight of quality
bibliographic record creation and authority
activities
PCC includes:




CONSER – serial records
BIBCO – bibliographic records (i.e., monographs)
NACO – name and series authority records
SACO – subject authority records
10
About the Subject Authority
Cooperative Program (SACO)


Established to provide a means for libraries
to submit subject headings and
classification numbers to the Library of
Congress
Provides training on preparing subject
heading proposals
11
About SACO (cont.)


First SACO workshop on preparation of basic
subject authority proposals held in 1997
Now also provides advanced training in particular
topic areas, such as:




languages and related literature
geographic headings
historical events
art
12
SACO Workshops


Often held as preconferences at ALA annual
meetings
SACO (and PCC) trains trainers who are active
regionally



Workshops offered for free or at cost
Host institutions must provide photocopies of
training materials
Trainers do not charge a fee, only transportation and
housing costs
13
SACO Workflow
1.
2.
3.
4.
Submitter prepares subject heading proposal,
including all necessary research, and submits by
email or web form
LC Cooperative Cataloging Team (Coop Team)
reviews proposal
LC’s Cataloging Policy and Support Office
(CPSO) conducts editorial review; included in
the next tentative LCSH Weekly List
Approved headings are published in the
Approved Library of Congress Subject Headings
Weekly Lists and ultimately in LCSH
14
Why wasn’t this proposal
approved?
Australia--Territories and possessions
Since --Territories and possessions is freefloating under names of places, this
proposal is not necessary.
15
Why wasn’t this proposal
approved? (cont.)
Crassostrea gigas culture
Headings are not established for the culture of
individual species. Instead, a heading for the
culture of the broader group of organisms (in this
case, Oyster culture) should be assigned in
conjunction with the heading for the species. The
proposal was not approved.
16
Why weren’t these proposals
approved?
Immigrant engineers; Immigrant scientists
There is a well-established pattern in LCSH of
using the form [class of persons], Foreign
for headings of this type. The proposed
headings were therefore changed to
Engineers, Foreign and Scientists,
Foreign.
17
SACO Membership


Any library already participating in a PCC
program (CONSER, NACO, BIBCO) is
automatically a member of SACO
Any other library wishing to be in SACO must




Complete an application
Commit to submitting 10-12 proposals each year
have catalogers with a basic knowledge of the
procedures and guidelines in SCM, familiarity with
LCSH and Free-Floating Subdivisions, MARC 21
Authority Format, and standard reference sources
Have access to LC authority files
18
OCLC




OCLC: Online Computer Library Center
Member organization: 9,000 members
Used by over 50,000 libraries in 96
countries
WorldCat: 58 million bibliographic records
19
Role of OCLC in authority
control



Provides access to the National Authority
File (subjects, names, series)
Provides interface for submitting name and
series authority proposals (but not subjects)
Provides interface for submitting
corrections to authority records (usually in
consultation with LC)
20