Draft report of the e- and print-versions cataloging task force: August 2, 2007
Tangible and Online Collections at Yale
Yale Library has a significant number of items in both tangible and online formats.
Although the exact number of titles with a format overlap is unknown, there are hundreds
of thousands of titles in Yale Library collections held in both tangible and online formats.
To suggest the scale of the overlap: Yale Library subscribes to about 50,000 online
serials, leases about 700,000 online books, provides access to hundreds of thousands of
online government documents, and increasingly digitizes materials in its collections.
Many thousands of items--books, serials, maps, prints, manuscripts, photographs, sound
recordings--are being digitized and need to be cataloged. Generally, these online
materials duplicate tangible materials (e.g. print, microfilm) in Yale Library collections.
Yale Library policies and procedures for cataloging materials held in tangible and online
formats need to be aligned with its collection development, materials processing, and user
service goals, well-articulated, clearly documented, and consistently applied.
Current Cataloging Policies and Practices at Yale
Yale Library has had policies and procedures for cataloging online resources since 1995,
when a task force on cataloging e-serials issued its report and recommendations.
Generally for online serials, Yale has followed CONSER policy and, although, Yale
Library has preferred the separate record option, practice has been pragmatic. More
recently, Yale Library has developed policies and procedures for online books and
integrating resources. Current policy and procedure documents for cataloging online
resources are available online:
Cataloging Online Books (Electronic Editions)
http://www.library.yale.edu/cataloging/mst/marc/obe.html
Cataloging Online Books (Reproductions)
http://www.library.yale.edu/cataloging/mst/marc/obr.html
Cataloging Online Integrating Resources
http://www.library.yale.edu/cataloging/mst/marc/oir.html
E-resources Record Loads at Yale
http://www.library.yale.edu/~lso/databaseadmin/eresource/
Fixed Field Coding in Records for Online Resources
http://www.library.yale.edu/cataloging/mst/marc/type.html
Online serial cataloging policies and procedures are based on CONSER policy
http://www.loc.gov/acq/conser/Module31.pdf
Cataloging policies and practices for digitized maps, prints, sound recordings, etc. are
under development within the particular units responsible for the materials.
Using Separate Records or Single Records at Yale
The primary policy decision regarding the preferred cataloging treatment for materials
held both in tangible and online forms in Yale Library collections is centered on the
choice between using one bibliographic record as a surrogate for multiple versions or
formats of the same work or using separate bibliographic records as surrogates for each
distinct version or format of the same work. The arguments for and against each of these
approaches has been powered by perceptions of the user’s need for ease of use, the
limitations of the OPAC record and index displays, and the need for inventory control
over the entities in our collections. Or, in the words of our charge, achieving processing
efficiencies, improving the user experience, and meeting the needs of units charged with
managing complex collections. Practices at Yale Library such as dashed-on entries for
subsequent editions of a work or the “single record” approach for print and online
formats of serials have been widespread, but exceptional, expediencies. These practices,
often begun with ease of use or cutting costs in mind, proved unmanageable and less user
friendly over time. Yale Library has preferred to use separate bibliographic records as
surrogates for distinct versions and formats of the works in its collections.
However, as our experience with holding and describing materials in both tangible and
online formats has grown in the past decade, a conceptual and practical distinction is now
apparent. The intellectual and artistic works in the collections at Yale Library are of two
types, and each of these types demands a distinct cataloging treatment. One type of work
is that generally appropriate to textual material, printed music scores, sound recordings,
and video or moving pictures. This type of work is abstract. Such works can be copied-carried or expressed--in numerous versions without lessening the fullness of the work
itself. This abstract type of work may be completely present in many copies, various
editions and formats, but the physical setting of the work is distinct from any other in
many important particulars such as its format and size. For materials that carry this type
of work, separate bibliographic records are strongly preferred at Yale Library.
The other type of work is that generally appropriate to maps, manuscripts, graphic
materials, and 3-dimensional objects. This type of work is concrete. The work is
inseparable from the physical object itself, and may be most familiar to us in works of art.
Such physical works can not be copied without lessening the fullness of the work itself.
This physical type of work is only completely present in the original object. Copies are
diminished substitutes for the originals. For such works in Yale Library collections,
digital images of the work are most usefully considered either as part of the metadata
about the work itself or, at best, only a partial substitute for the original. Digital
representations of these objects may usefully serve as surrogates for classroom or
reference use. For materials in Yale Library collections that are such physical works,
single records for the physical objects that include active reference links to the digital
surrogates are strongly preferred.
Recommended Policy on Cataloging Treatment for Materials Held Both in Tangible
and Online Forms
Recommendation 1: Create a separate bibliographic record for such material as a
printed text, printed music score, sound recording, and video or moving picture
Recommendation 2:. Create single record with an active reference link (i.e.
URL) to the digital surrogate of the object described in the record, for such
material as a map, manuscript, graphic material, or 3-dimensional object
Exceptions
For both situations above, there may be exceptions in practice. Expediency is the
rationale for exceptions to the above policies.
For example, we receive records for US government documents from the Government
Printing Office (GPO). When the Government Printing Office used a single record
approach to catalog its documents, we used their records and thus followed their single
record policy. Since the Government Printing Office changed their policy to use separate
records (for the reasons we prefer them), we now use their records and thus follow their
current separate record policy. The reason is expediency. As we have limited staff
devoted to cataloging government documents and the volume of government documents
is high, we load the GPO records as they are.
Recommendation 3: Exceptions need to be determined programmatically by the
library and not individually by units or catalogers. The Chief Catalog Librarian
will determine when and whether an exception to the policy will be made.
The User Experience
Our charge calls for us to consider how our decisions affect user experience with
discovery of and access to the resources in our collections that are available in both
tangible and online formats. The richness and complexity of our collections should not
be an impediment to access; nor should we define the problems as user education needs.
We must design systems and provide the metadata that allow our users to understand our
collections, discover the materials in the collections, identify, select and get the materials
best suited to their needs. In order to simplify the user interface, clarify the format
selection options for users, and improve navigation among multiple formats of a given
resource or set of resources, we make the following suggestions.
Recommendation 4: Investigate, select and implement next generation OPAC
tools that support FRBR-like grouping of titles for display, including:
a. support for faceted navigation or browsing of related bibliographic and
holdings records by format, availability, and bibliographic relationships
b. enable users to readily distinguish online materials from tangible materials in
searches and in the resulting index and item displays
c. highlight critical bibliographic relationships in the default record display, e.g.
links to successive serial records
d. support integrated display of holdings for serials across title changes and
formats so that users need not jump from one bibliographic record to another to
see Yale’s holdings in a given periodical
Pending implementation of such tools
Recommendation 5: For print subscriptions replaced by an online version,
follow the practice of the science and medical libraries by inserting a public note
in the record for the print version: "Subscription cancelled after [year]. Available
online.” Do not add a URL to the print version.
The effectiveness of this policy depends on the OPAC search result displays to collocate
the tangible and online formats of materials in our collections. This is generally
accomplished by similarity or matches in titles.
Task Force Charge and Membership
Name
Task Force to Reconsider Cataloging Treatment of Certain Titles Acquired Both in Print
and Electronic Form
Charge
Examine existing Orbis cataloging guidelines and policies that support control over,
discovery of, and access to those resources we have in multiple tangible and online
formats. Consider and recommend changes to these guidelines and policies that:
1. Achieve processing efficiencies (e.g. lower costs, improve timeliness, increase
capacity for throughput)
2. Improve user experience with discovery of and access to the resources (e.g.
simplify the user interface, clarify the format selection options for the user,
improve navigation among multiple formats of a given resource or set of
resources)
3. Meet the needs of units charged with managing collections with resources in
multiple tangible and online formats (e.g. inventory, access, preservation)
Deliverables
A report by July 1 with specific recommendations and rationales for changes in existing
cataloging guidelines and policies.
Membership
Matthew Beacom, Chair
Andy Shimp
Patricia Thurston
Rowena Griem
Emily Horning
Chris Smith