2022-11-16 Cataloging meeting notes

 Date Nov 16, 2022

Zoom

Join Zoom Meeting:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/89480945052?pwd=SElGZVB3K2hYTGtNUStaa1lhaDFJZz09

Meeting ID: 894 8094 5052

Passcode: 986581

One tap mobile
+17193594580,,89480945052# US
+12532158782,,89480945052# US (Tacoma)

 Participants

  • @Lloyd Chittenden

 Goals

  •  

 Discussion topics

Time

Notes

Time

Notes

Number of records loaded annually

We guess there would be about 25,000 new records added each year. That requires budgeting $1,500 a year for authority work. Next year will be extra to catch up from last year.

What is the deal with 940 field?

This field is obsolete.

Acquisitions processes

Lloyd met with Lafayette and Ingram about a new acquisitions process. Ingram is not willing to do any custom programing like they did for Boulder, so they will not replicate that process for other libraries.

What they will do is the standard process of getting the .o number from Sierra when the order is FTPed to them. They will then include that .o number as a match point when they send the final bib records.

Lloyd can set up the load profiles to use this process. So how can we protect existing records from overlay with these incoming records? Sierra has a system that allows you to prevent overlay based on comparing the encoding level of the two records. This compares the encoding level in the incoming MARC record to the one in the target MARC record. You can even define your own codes. So for example we could tell Ingram send all order records with a code that we define as lower than all other codes, so the order records would never overlay any existing record. Edited records in Sierra could be given another code we define as higher than all other codes. So then even if Ingram sends a full level record it would not overlay one of our locally edited records.

Also, Lloyd realized that Loveland is already using the OneClick process to order records from Ingram, so others should be able to use this as well.

Loveland and Louisville mention they have acquisitions staff who are not in this conversation. Any acquisitions discussions should include them. Laura at Loveland and Jill and Louisville.

945

Guideline currently says the 945 is required, but we don’t know what it is. It appears that it is used to store item information from an ILS migration. This is the standard use for this field. This is not the same field used to create ongoing items. This should be retained because it often contains circulation information from the previous ILS. There are only 37 of them in the system now. Some of those contain OCLC numbers, but nobody knows about these OCLC numbers.

988

This is the field that Sierra uses to export order record information. It is problematic to store this in Sierra because the export should only be current order records, but if you keep this in the MARC record in Sierra it would be exported as if it were a currently attached order, even if it is no longer attached to this record. Lloyd thinks these should be deleted from Sierra. He wants to ask Beth about these.

998

Used mostly for tracking changes internally. Also used to find where cataloging problems are happening at other libraries.

Delete 900, 902, 903, 905, 906, 925, 910, 913, 960, 961

The load profiles could be set to just not load these fields.

Z39.50

Mostly used as an alternative method of getting records from SkyRiver. Nobody at this meeting is using ItsMARC for cataloging. The ItsMARC links could be removed. Lloyd will look for other obsolete targets in this list and remove them.

Question: Lloyd did not get any of Beth’s documentation. Mark will contact her and see if there is documentation we should have.

 

45 min

 Action items

 Decisions

  1. @Lloyd Chittenden will remove ItsMARC links from the Sierra Z39.50 and find other obsolete links.
  2. @Lloyd Chittenden will clean up load profiles so unwanted 9xx fields will not be loaded.