Earliest/Latest/Successive Entry Cataloging (2 messages) Birdie MacLennan 27 Sep 1993 12:18 UTC
2 messages; 58 lines: ------------------------- Date: Fri, 24 Sep 1993 11:18:00 -0800 From: Crystal_Graham%UCSDLIBRARY.UCSD.EDU@SDSC.BITNET Subject: Earliest entry cataloging I have not yet had a chance to review the archives of Serialst on the latest vs. successive entry controversy, but I noted with some relief that many were headed Latest/EARLIEST/Successive entry. In an online environment, it makes sense to consider the use of a single record for straightforward title variations (as opposed to mergers, splits, absorptions, etc.) where the numbering continues. But we are misguided if we propose a return to "latest entry." To me, the single best thing about AACR2 was that we began basing the description on the FIRST issue. The constant adjustment of place of publication, publisher, etc., was a collosal waste of time. We are edging toward earliest entry as we choose to add 246's for later title variations rather than creating a successive entry. Let's encourage CONSER and the ALA Committee to Study Serials Cataloging to seriously look at expanding that practice. We must also remember that we share records internationally and need to get consensus among all the ISDS participants before we deviate from established standards. (We certainly don't want 6 ISSN's assigned to one bibliographic record!) We should not go back to latest entry cataloging. We should go forward to earliest entry. (Are you feeling dizzy yet?) Crystal Graham Serials Cataloging Section Head University of California, San Diego cgraham@ucsd.edu ------------------------------- Date: Sat, 25 Sep 1993 12:40:00 EDT From: Johanna Bowen <BOWEN@SNYCORVA.BITNET> Subject: Successive entry vs. Latest entry Successive entry is the best choice if: -the collection is shelved alphabetically -the users are primarily seeking a specific citation Virtually every user of our periodical collection is approaching the collection with a citation hastily scribbled or recently printed from a CD-ROM. These undergraduates have little or no need for access to the continuous run of any one title. Checking the cited title against either an OPAC or a printout of serial holdings requires one lookup to verify we own the title AS CITED. Latest entry cataloging requires a much more complex user education program, and in some OPACS provides totally baffling results (two to three screens with no reference to the cited title). Successive entry cataloging provides a direct path from the title cited to the title owned by the library. Unless of course the title is Journals of gerontology. OCLC has only the 246 for journal(s) but we have to leave it as Journal of... which places the alphabetical position miles from where it should be. Johanna Bowen, Coordinator for Technical Services bitnet: bowen@snycorva internet: bowen@snycorva.cortland.edu