[Enhance] LC records overlaying OCLC master records

[D. Brooking]

Richard,

I was just looking at a record I asked LC to correct. (#69594228). 
Cyrillic was retained, as well as the 546 and 041 that I added.

BUT -- the 040 $b eng and the 936  PR 163640087 were wiped out by the 
overlay process. You might want to consider protecting those fields as 
well as part of the parallel record scheme??




************
Diana Brooking             (206) 685-0389
Cataloging Librarian       (206) 685-8782 fax
Suzzallo Library           dbrookin at u.washington.edu
University of Washington
Box 352900
Seattle WA  98195-2900

On Fri, 17 Oct 2008, Greene,Richard wrote:


> The software that merges data and chooses which data to retain when an

> LC record overlays an existing record is quite complex.  It is designed

> to retain useful unique data from both records and the most

> authoritative data possible, whenever that can be determined.  Due to

> differences in cataloging practices, tagging, etc., the results are not

> always what we expect but we are always looking for improvement.

> Software will not always determine the best data and most useful data in

> the same way as a human would.

>

> You are correct about the non-Roman data.  We try to match up non-Roman

> data to the corresponding roman-only field and link and retain both of

> them.  If we find non-Roman fields that we cannot link to a roman-only

> field, we usually merge it to the record with the expectation that a

> user will find the record and link the fields correctly.

>

> We have also taken steps to preserve series work as performed by our

> users.  Tag 440 field will always be retained over tag 490 if the

> contents are the same, even when an LC record replaces an existing

> record.  We do not want to lose the information related to tracing.

>

> Each tag that is considered for merging from one record to another has

> its own set of rules.  The general rule is that, if the data is not

> present in the record that will be kept, it will be merged from the

> record being replaced.  Examples of this might be contents notes, call

> numbers, and subject headings.  In the latter instance, we retain all

> subject headings that are in a scheme not found in the retained record.

> For example, if an LC record contains LC subject headings and matches to

> a record that contains only Sears headings, the resulting WorldCat

> record will contain the LC subject headings assigned by LC and the Sears

> headings already in the record.  For additional information about the

> fields that automatically transfer, see the Enhance Training Outline

> (http://www.oclc.org/support/training/worldcat/enhanceoutline/) in

> "Requirements, policies, and practices," Section E. Bibliographic

> Duplicates, Number 6.

>

>

> Unfortunately, the software will not always retain the most accurate and

> up to date information.  If you have corrected a typographical error in

> a record and the new version of the LC record has the same typo, the

> software will put the error back into WorldCat and your correction will

> be lost.  However, if you are adding information that improves access,

> such as call numbers, non-LC subject headings, geographic area codes,

> contents notes, etc., there is a good possibility that your enhancements

> will be retained in the new record.

>

> Rich Greene

> OCLC, Inc.

> 6565 Kilgour Place

> Dublin, OH 43017

> 614-764-6154

> email:  richard_greene at oclc.org

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: enhance-bounces at mailman1.u.washington.edu

> [mailto:enhance-bounces at mailman1.u.washington.edu] On Behalf Of D.

> Brooking

> Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 6:46 PM

> To: enhance at u.washington.edu

> Subject: [Enhance] LC records overlaying OCLC master records

>

>

> Dear Enhancers,

>

> I need to have a review of what could happen should LC make any changes

> to a record that would then get redistributed, including to OCLC. Which

> if any fields are protected from overlay in OCLC?

>

> I am concerned because we are increasingly making enhancements and

> corrections to LC records in the area of international studies, changes

> that don't result in a change in encoding level.

>

> I seem to remember that non-Roman fields that LC lacks will not get

> wiped out, and that some kind of series protection is now there so

> series don't all revert back to 490s. But what about other things? LC

> records are treated differently than all others, but I am not sure this

> makes sense any longer in the new "network-level" environment we are

> trying to build.

>

>

> ************

> Diana Brooking             (206) 685-0389

> Cataloging Librarian       (206) 685-8782 fax

> Suzzallo Library           dbrookin at u.washington.edu

> University of Washington

> Box 352900

> Seattle WA  98195-2900

> _______________________________________________

> Enhance mailing list

> Enhance at u.washington.edu

> http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/enhance

>

>

> _______________________________________________

> Enhance mailing list

> Enhance at u.washington.edu

> http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/enhance

>