Also what Joshua said (just saw that!). Sent from my iPhone > On Aug 9, 2018, at 10:50 AM, Honor Moody <hmmoody@gmail.com> wrote: > > Violet put it much nicer than I would have (my original draft may have included the phrase, “that’s fucking bullshit”). > > I think you could push back and argue that by following non-standard cataloging practice LA public runs the risk of not being able to accept copy from other libraries as is, and creates more work for catalogers at other institutions who will need to upgrade any records produced by LA to conform to standard practice. > > I’m not sure what classification system you’re using (though I’m assuming Dewey), but there is no reason other than the need to document a non-standard practice why you can’t cutter however you like (if the world ended if a library adapted cutters to fit local needs none of us would be here). > > > Indeed, if you are shelving by title, I wouldn’t bother to class at all, just use 852 first indicator 5 with $l for shelving title: > https://www.loc.gov/marc/holdings/hd852.html > > Good luck! > Honor > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Aug 8, 2018, at 11:30 PM, jenna freedman <leslzine@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> You could also use the example of xZINECOREx/Dublin Core as the PARAGON of zine catalogery. >> >>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 11:29 PM jenna freedman <leslzine@gmail.com> wrote: >>> I would try for the 100 before settling for the 700 if you can convince them that the fact that nearly every other library cataloging in WorldCat in English means they should follow precedent, rather than setting a new bad precedent. >>> >>> But Violet's response may help you keep things friendly! >>> >>>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 10:47 PM Ziba Zehdar <ziba.zehdar@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> Sounds like a plan! >>>> >>>>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 7:46 PM Violet <violetfox@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> Let's wait and see if other catalogers have a chance to chime in tomorrow! >>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018, 10:41 PM Ziba Zehdar <ziba.zehdar@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> Great! >>>>>> >>>>>> I'll reply with this, what do you think? >>>>>> >>>>>> "Hello Catherine, >>>>>> >>>>>> Thank you so much for the mock ups! >>>>>> >>>>>> After conferring with the zine librarians that catalog around the nation, we ask that all listed authors are put in a 700 field if not 100 field please, thank you. >>>>>> >>>>>> Best," >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Zlunioncat mailing list >>>> Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org >>>> http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org >>> >>> >>> -- >>> http://lowereastsidelibrarian.info >>> http://zines.barnard.edu >>> http://leslzine.storenvy.com >>> http://zinecat.org >>> she, her >> >> >> -- >> http://lowereastsidelibrarian.info >> http://zines.barnard.edu >> http://leslzine.storenvy.com >> http://zinecat.org >> she, her >> _______________________________________________ >> Zlunioncat mailing list >> Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org >> http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org _______________________________________________ Zlunioncat mailing list Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org

They wrote us this morning that: “A lot of what we do down here is known as local practice - basically rules for the cataloging staff to follow on a consistent basis, and the rules are unique to LAPL. The practice here is to not include a 100 field when we cutter by title. We can do a 700 added field, which will make the author search field valid for patrons in the catalog, and librarians using CARL. I'll insert a 700 field for some of the sample records later today (the ones with listed authors) so you can test it out with an author search. Let me know - this'll likely be the best option.” > On Aug 9, 2018, at 7:51 AM, Honor Moody <hmmoody@gmail.com> wrote: > > Also what Joshua said (just saw that!). > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Aug 9, 2018, at 10:50 AM, Honor Moody <hmmoody@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Violet put it much nicer than I would have (my original draft may have included the phrase, “that’s fucking bullshit”). >> >> I think you could push back and argue that by following non-standard cataloging practice LA public runs the risk of not being able to accept copy from other libraries as is, and creates more work for catalogers at other institutions who will need to upgrade any records produced by LA to conform to standard practice. >> >> I’m not sure what classification system you’re using (though I’m assuming Dewey), but there is no reason other than the need to document a non-standard practice why you can’t cutter however you like (if the world ended if a library adapted cutters to fit local needs none of us would be here). >> >> >> Indeed, if you are shelving by title, I wouldn’t bother to class at all, just use 852 first indicator 5 with $l for shelving title: >> https://www.loc.gov/marc/holdings/hd852.html >> >> Good luck! >> Honor >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >>> On Aug 8, 2018, at 11:30 PM, jenna freedman <leslzine@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> You could also use the example of xZINECOREx/Dublin Core as the PARAGON of zine catalogery. >>> >>>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 11:29 PM jenna freedman <leslzine@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> I would try for the 100 before settling for the 700 if you can convince them that the fact that nearly every other library cataloging in WorldCat in English means they should follow precedent, rather than setting a new bad precedent. >>>> >>>> But Violet's response may help you keep things friendly! >>>> >>>>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 10:47 PM Ziba Zehdar <ziba.zehdar@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> Sounds like a plan! >>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 7:46 PM Violet <violetfox@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> Let's wait and see if other catalogers have a chance to chime in tomorrow! >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018, 10:41 PM Ziba Zehdar <ziba.zehdar@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> Great! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'll reply with this, what do you think? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Hello Catherine, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thank you so much for the mock ups! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> After conferring with the zine librarians that catalog around the nation, we ask that all listed authors are put in a 700 field if not 100 field please, thank you. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best," >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Zlunioncat mailing list >>>>> Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org >>>>> http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> http://lowereastsidelibrarian.info >>>> http://zines.barnard.edu >>>> http://leslzine.storenvy.com >>>> http://zinecat.org >>>> she, her >>> >>> >>> -- >>> http://lowereastsidelibrarian.info >>> http://zines.barnard.edu >>> http://leslzine.storenvy.com >>> http://zinecat.org >>> she, her >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Zlunioncat mailing list >>> Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org >>> http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org > _______________________________________________ > Zlunioncat mailing list > Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org > http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org _______________________________________________ Zlunioncat mailing list Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org

I'm curious why shelve by title? Zines at Barnard are shelved and Cuttered by author (when it is none, title otherwise). It's really great to be able to see all the zines by one creator together. My favorite example is the work of Emily K. Larned. We've got her zines from high school through college to her becoming a book artist and returning to zine making after an eleven-year break. Jenna On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 11:08 AM Ziba Zehdar <ziba.zehdar@gmail.com> wrote: > They wrote us this morning that: “A lot of what we do down here is known > as local practice - basically rules for the cataloging staff to follow on a > consistent basis, and the rules are unique to LAPL. The practice here is to > not include a 100 field when we cutter by title. We can do a 700 added > field, which will make the author search field valid for patrons in the > catalog, and librarians using CARL. I'll insert a 700 field for some of the > sample records later today (the ones with listed authors) so you can test > it out with an author search. Let me know - this'll likely be the best > option.” > > On Aug 9, 2018, at 7:51 AM, Honor Moody <hmmoody@gmail.com> wrote: > > Also what Joshua said (just saw that!). > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Aug 9, 2018, at 10:50 AM, Honor Moody <hmmoody@gmail.com> wrote: > > Violet put it much nicer than I would have (my original draft may have > included the phrase, “that’s fucking bullshit”). > > I think you could push back and argue that by following non-standard > cataloging practice LA public runs the risk of not being able to accept > copy from other libraries as is, and creates more work for catalogers at > other institutions who will need to upgrade any records produced by LA to > conform to standard practice. > > I’m not sure what classification system you’re using (though I’m assuming > Dewey), but there is no reason other than the need to document a > non-standard practice why you can’t cutter however you like (if the world > ended if a library adapted cutters to fit local needs none of us would be > here). > > > Indeed, if you are shelving by title, I wouldn’t bother to class at all, > just use 852 first indicator 5 with $l for shelving title: > https://www.loc.gov/marc/holdings/hd852.html > > Good luck! > Honor > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Aug 8, 2018, at 11:30 PM, jenna freedman <leslzine@gmail.com> wrote: > > You could also use the example of xZINECOREx/Dublin Core as the PARAGON of > zine catalogery. > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 11:29 PM jenna freedman <leslzine@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I would try for the 100 before settling for the 700 if you can convince >> them that the fact that nearly every other library cataloging in WorldCat >> in English means they should follow precedent, rather than setting a new >> bad precedent. >> >> But Violet's response may help you keep things friendly! >> >> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 10:47 PM Ziba Zehdar <ziba.zehdar@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Sounds like a plan! >>> >>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 7:46 PM Violet <violetfox@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Let's wait and see if other catalogers have a chance to chime in >>>> tomorrow! >>>> >>>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018, 10:41 PM Ziba Zehdar <ziba.zehdar@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Great! >>>>> >>>>> I'll reply with this, what do you think? >>>>> >>>>> "Hello Catherine, >>>>> >>>>> Thank you so much for the mock ups! >>>>> >>>>> After conferring with the zine librarians that catalog around the >>>>> nation, we ask that all listed authors are put in a 700 field if not >>>>> 100 field please, thank you. >>>>> >>>>> Best," >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>> Zlunioncat mailing list >>> Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org >>> http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org >>> >> >> >> -- >> http://lowereastsidelibrarian.info >> http://zines.barnard.edu >> http://leslzine.storenvy.com >> http://zinecat.org >> she, her >> > > > -- > http://lowereastsidelibrarian.info > http://zines.barnard.edu > http://leslzine.storenvy.com > http://zinecat.org > she, her > > _______________________________________________ > Zlunioncat mailing list > Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org > http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org > > _______________________________________________ > Zlunioncat mailing list > Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org > http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org > > _______________________________________________ > Zlunioncat mailing list > Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org > http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org > -- http://lowereastsidelibrarian.info http://zines.barnard.edu http://leslzine.storenvy.com http://zinecat.org she, her _______________________________________________ Zlunioncat mailing list Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org

I'm curious about shelving by title, too. It has to be because folks are treating them like periodicals? On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 10:12 AM, jenna freedman <leslzine@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm curious why shelve by title? Zines at Barnard are shelved and Cuttered > by author (when it is none, title otherwise). It's really great to be able > to see all the zines by one creator together. My favorite example is the > work of Emily K. Larned. We've got her zines from high school through > college to her becoming a book artist and returning to zine making after an > eleven-year break. > > Jenna > > On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 11:08 AM Ziba Zehdar <ziba.zehdar@gmail.com> wrote: > >> They wrote us this morning that: “A lot of what we do down here is known >> as local practice - basically rules for the cataloging staff to follow on a >> consistent basis, and the rules are unique to LAPL. The practice here is to >> not include a 100 field when we cutter by title. We can do a 700 added >> field, which will make the author search field valid for patrons in the >> catalog, and librarians using CARL. I'll insert a 700 field for some of the >> sample records later today (the ones with listed authors) so you can test >> it out with an author search. Let me know - this'll likely be the best >> option.” >> >> On Aug 9, 2018, at 7:51 AM, Honor Moody <hmmoody@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Also what Joshua said (just saw that!). >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On Aug 9, 2018, at 10:50 AM, Honor Moody <hmmoody@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Violet put it much nicer than I would have (my original draft may have >> included the phrase, “that’s fucking bullshit”). >> >> I think you could push back and argue that by following non-standard >> cataloging practice LA public runs the risk of not being able to accept >> copy from other libraries as is, and creates more work for catalogers at >> other institutions who will need to upgrade any records produced by LA to >> conform to standard practice. >> >> I’m not sure what classification system you’re using (though I’m assuming >> Dewey), but there is no reason other than the need to document a >> non-standard practice why you can’t cutter however you like (if the world >> ended if a library adapted cutters to fit local needs none of us would be >> here). >> >> >> Indeed, if you are shelving by title, I wouldn’t bother to class at all, >> just use 852 first indicator 5 with $l for shelving title: >> https://www.loc.gov/marc/holdings/hd852.html >> >> Good luck! >> Honor >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On Aug 8, 2018, at 11:30 PM, jenna freedman <leslzine@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> You could also use the example of xZINECOREx/Dublin Core as the PARAGON >> of zine catalogery. >> >> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 11:29 PM jenna freedman <leslzine@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> I would try for the 100 before settling for the 700 if you can convince >>> them that the fact that nearly every other library cataloging in WorldCat >>> in English means they should follow precedent, rather than setting a new >>> bad precedent. >>> >>> But Violet's response may help you keep things friendly! >>> >>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 10:47 PM Ziba Zehdar <ziba.zehdar@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Sounds like a plan! >>>> >>>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 7:46 PM Violet <violetfox@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Let's wait and see if other catalogers have a chance to chime in >>>>> tomorrow! >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018, 10:41 PM Ziba Zehdar <ziba.zehdar@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Great! >>>>>> >>>>>> I'll reply with this, what do you think? >>>>>> >>>>>> "Hello Catherine, >>>>>> >>>>>> Thank you so much for the mock ups! >>>>>> >>>>>> After conferring with the zine librarians that catalog around the >>>>>> nation, we ask that all listed authors are put in a 700 field if not >>>>>> 100 field please, thank you. >>>>>> >>>>>> Best," >>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Zlunioncat mailing list >>>> Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org >>>> http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> http://lowereastsidelibrarian.info >>> http://zines.barnard.edu >>> http://leslzine.storenvy.com >>> http://zinecat.org >>> she, her >>> >> >> >> -- >> http://lowereastsidelibrarian.info >> http://zines.barnard.edu >> http://leslzine.storenvy.com >> http://zinecat.org >> she, her >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Zlunioncat mailing list >> Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org >> http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Zlunioncat mailing list >> Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org >> http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Zlunioncat mailing list >> Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org >> http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org >> > > > -- > http://lowereastsidelibrarian.info > http://zines.barnard.edu > http://leslzine.storenvy.com > http://zinecat.org > she, her > > _______________________________________________ > Zlunioncat mailing list > Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org > http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org > > _______________________________________________ Zlunioncat mailing list Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org

We all shelve by title at Denver Zine Library... but Jenna's point is making me begin to feel otherwise.... On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 9:18 AM Adam Paradis <adamparadis@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm curious about shelving by title, too. It has to be because folks are > treating them like periodicals? > > On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 10:12 AM, jenna freedman <leslzine@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> I'm curious why shelve by title? Zines at Barnard are shelved and >> Cuttered by author (when it is none, title otherwise). It's really great to >> be able to see all the zines by one creator together. My favorite example >> is the work of Emily K. Larned. We've got her zines from high school >> through college to her becoming a book artist and returning to zine making >> after an eleven-year break. >> >> Jenna >> >> On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 11:08 AM Ziba Zehdar <ziba.zehdar@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> They wrote us this morning that: “A lot of what we do down here is >>> known as local practice - basically rules for the cataloging staff to >>> follow on a consistent basis, and the rules are unique to LAPL. The >>> practice here is to not include a 100 field when we cutter by title. We can >>> do a 700 added field, which will make the author search field valid for >>> patrons in the catalog, and librarians using CARL. I'll insert a 700 field >>> for some of the sample records later today (the ones with listed authors) >>> so you can test it out with an author search. Let me know - this'll likely >>> be the best option.” >>> >>> On Aug 9, 2018, at 7:51 AM, Honor Moody <hmmoody@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Also what Joshua said (just saw that!). >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>> On Aug 9, 2018, at 10:50 AM, Honor Moody <hmmoody@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Violet put it much nicer than I would have (my original draft may have >>> included the phrase, “that’s fucking bullshit”). >>> >>> I think you could push back and argue that by following non-standard >>> cataloging practice LA public runs the risk of not being able to accept >>> copy from other libraries as is, and creates more work for catalogers at >>> other institutions who will need to upgrade any records produced by LA to >>> conform to standard practice. >>> >>> I’m not sure what classification system you’re using (though I’m >>> assuming Dewey), but there is no reason other than the need to document a >>> non-standard practice why you can’t cutter however you like (if the world >>> ended if a library adapted cutters to fit local needs none of us would be >>> here). >>> >>> >>> Indeed, if you are shelving by title, I wouldn’t bother to class at all, >>> just use 852 first indicator 5 with $l for shelving title: >>> https://www.loc.gov/marc/holdings/hd852.html >>> >>> Good luck! >>> Honor >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>> On Aug 8, 2018, at 11:30 PM, jenna freedman <leslzine@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> You could also use the example of xZINECOREx/Dublin Core as the PARAGON >>> of zine catalogery. >>> >>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 11:29 PM jenna freedman <leslzine@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I would try for the 100 before settling for the 700 if you can convince >>>> them that the fact that nearly every other library cataloging in WorldCat >>>> in English means they should follow precedent, rather than setting a new >>>> bad precedent. >>>> >>>> But Violet's response may help you keep things friendly! >>>> >>>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 10:47 PM Ziba Zehdar <ziba.zehdar@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Sounds like a plan! >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 7:46 PM Violet <violetfox@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Let's wait and see if other catalogers have a chance to chime in >>>>>> tomorrow! >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018, 10:41 PM Ziba Zehdar <ziba.zehdar@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Great! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'll reply with this, what do you think? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Hello Catherine, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thank you so much for the mock ups! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> After conferring with the zine librarians that catalog around the >>>>>>> nation, we ask that all listed authors are put in a 700 field if >>>>>>> not 100 field please, thank you. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best," >>>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Zlunioncat mailing list >>>>> Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org >>>>> http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> http://lowereastsidelibrarian.info >>>> http://zines.barnard.edu >>>> http://leslzine.storenvy.com >>>> http://zinecat.org >>>> she, her >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> http://lowereastsidelibrarian.info >>> http://zines.barnard.edu >>> http://leslzine.storenvy.com >>> http://zinecat.org >>> she, her >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Zlunioncat mailing list >>> Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org >>> http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Zlunioncat mailing list >>> Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org >>> http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Zlunioncat mailing list >>> Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org >>> http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org >>> >> >> >> -- >> http://lowereastsidelibrarian.info >> http://zines.barnard.edu >> http://leslzine.storenvy.com >> http://zinecat.org >> she, her >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Zlunioncat mailing list >> Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org >> http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Zlunioncat mailing list > Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org > http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org > -- Hana Zittel, Librarian Books & Borrowing Denver Public Library 10 W. 14th Ave Pkwy, Denver, CO 80204 720-865-1487 Email: hzittel@denverlibrary.org pronouns: she, her, hers -- _______________________________________________ Zlunioncat mailing list Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org

There's probably not much you can do if they are wed to their local practice, but as someone who has spent the last hour analyzing records for conferences in our local authority file, all I can say is that local practice=data cleanup and data migration issues down the line. While I understand the need to streamline workflows as much as possible, as a profession we have past the point where we can continue to act as if our local data is the only data that matters. The more we make decisions with only our local institutional needs in mind, the more difficult we make it for our users who are less and less interested in our institutional boundaries. [Getting off soap box now.] Honor On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 12:15 PM, Hana Zittel <hzittel@denverlibrary.org> wrote: > We all shelve by title at Denver Zine Library... but Jenna's point is > making me begin to feel otherwise.... > > On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 9:18 AM Adam Paradis <adamparadis@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I'm curious about shelving by title, too. It has to be because folks are >> treating them like periodicals? >> >> On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 10:12 AM, jenna freedman <leslzine@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> I'm curious why shelve by title? Zines at Barnard are shelved and >>> Cuttered by author (when it is none, title otherwise). It's really great to >>> be able to see all the zines by one creator together. My favorite example >>> is the work of Emily K. Larned. We've got her zines from high school >>> through college to her becoming a book artist and returning to zine making >>> after an eleven-year break. >>> >>> Jenna >>> >>> On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 11:08 AM Ziba Zehdar <ziba.zehdar@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> They wrote us this morning that: “A lot of what we do down here is >>>> known as local practice - basically rules for the cataloging staff to >>>> follow on a consistent basis, and the rules are unique to LAPL. The >>>> practice here is to not include a 100 field when we cutter by title. We can >>>> do a 700 added field, which will make the author search field valid for >>>> patrons in the catalog, and librarians using CARL. I'll insert a 700 field >>>> for some of the sample records later today (the ones with listed authors) >>>> so you can test it out with an author search. Let me know - this'll likely >>>> be the best option.” >>>> >>>> On Aug 9, 2018, at 7:51 AM, Honor Moody <hmmoody@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Also what Joshua said (just saw that!). >>>> >>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>> >>>> On Aug 9, 2018, at 10:50 AM, Honor Moody <hmmoody@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Violet put it much nicer than I would have (my original draft may have >>>> included the phrase, “that’s fucking bullshit”). >>>> >>>> I think you could push back and argue that by following non-standard >>>> cataloging practice LA public runs the risk of not being able to accept >>>> copy from other libraries as is, and creates more work for catalogers at >>>> other institutions who will need to upgrade any records produced by LA to >>>> conform to standard practice. >>>> >>>> I’m not sure what classification system you’re using (though I’m >>>> assuming Dewey), but there is no reason other than the need to document a >>>> non-standard practice why you can’t cutter however you like (if the world >>>> ended if a library adapted cutters to fit local needs none of us would be >>>> here). >>>> >>>> >>>> Indeed, if you are shelving by title, I wouldn’t bother to class at >>>> all, just use 852 first indicator 5 with $l for shelving title: >>>> https://www.loc.gov/marc/holdings/hd852.html >>>> >>>> Good luck! >>>> Honor >>>> >>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>> >>>> On Aug 8, 2018, at 11:30 PM, jenna freedman <leslzine@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> You could also use the example of xZINECOREx/Dublin Core as the PARAGON >>>> of zine catalogery. >>>> >>>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 11:29 PM jenna freedman <leslzine@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I would try for the 100 before settling for the 700 if you can >>>>> convince them that the fact that nearly every other library cataloging in >>>>> WorldCat in English means they should follow precedent, rather than setting >>>>> a new bad precedent. >>>>> >>>>> But Violet's response may help you keep things friendly! >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 10:47 PM Ziba Zehdar <ziba.zehdar@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Sounds like a plan! >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 7:46 PM Violet <violetfox@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Let's wait and see if other catalogers have a chance to chime in >>>>>>> tomorrow! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018, 10:41 PM Ziba Zehdar <ziba.zehdar@gmail.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Great! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'll reply with this, what do you think? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "Hello Catherine, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thank you so much for the mock ups! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> After conferring with the zine librarians that catalog around the >>>>>>>> nation, we ask that all listed authors are put in a 700 field if >>>>>>>> not 100 field please, thank you. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Best," >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Zlunioncat mailing list >>>>>> Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org >>>>>> http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> http://lowereastsidelibrarian.info >>>>> http://zines.barnard.edu >>>>> http://leslzine.storenvy.com >>>>> http://zinecat.org >>>>> she, her >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> http://lowereastsidelibrarian.info >>>> http://zines.barnard.edu >>>> http://leslzine.storenvy.com >>>> http://zinecat.org >>>> she, her >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Zlunioncat mailing list >>>> Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org >>>> http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Zlunioncat mailing list >>>> Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org >>>> http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Zlunioncat mailing list >>>> Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org >>>> http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> http://lowereastsidelibrarian.info >>> http://zines.barnard.edu >>> http://leslzine.storenvy.com >>> http://zinecat.org >>> she, her >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Zlunioncat mailing list >>> Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org >>> http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Zlunioncat mailing list >> Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org >> http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org >> > > > -- > Hana Zittel, Librarian > > Books & Borrowing > Denver Public Library > 10 W. 14th Ave Pkwy, Denver, CO 80204 > 720-865-1487 > > Email: hzittel@denverlibrary.org > pronouns: she, her, hers > > > _______________________________________________ > Zlunioncat mailing list > Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org > http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org > > _______________________________________________ Zlunioncat mailing list Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org

I've loved this thread and love you all! On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 1:01 PM Honor Moody <hmmoody@gmail.com> wrote: > There's probably not much you can do if they are wed to their local > practice, but as someone who has spent the last hour analyzing records for > conferences in our local authority file, all I can say is that local > practice=data cleanup and data migration issues down the line. > > While I understand the need to streamline workflows as much as possible, > as a profession we have past the point where we can continue to act as if > our local data is the only data that matters. The more we make decisions > with only our local institutional needs in mind, the more difficult we make > it for our users who are less and less interested in our institutional > boundaries. [Getting off soap box now.] > > Honor > > On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 12:15 PM, Hana Zittel <hzittel@denverlibrary.org> > wrote: > >> We all shelve by title at Denver Zine Library... but Jenna's point is >> making me begin to feel otherwise.... >> >> On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 9:18 AM Adam Paradis <adamparadis@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> I'm curious about shelving by title, too. It has to be because folks >>> are treating them like periodicals? >>> >>> On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 10:12 AM, jenna freedman <leslzine@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I'm curious why shelve by title? Zines at Barnard are shelved and >>>> Cuttered by author (when it is none, title otherwise). It's really great to >>>> be able to see all the zines by one creator together. My favorite example >>>> is the work of Emily K. Larned. We've got her zines from high school >>>> through college to her becoming a book artist and returning to zine making >>>> after an eleven-year break. >>>> >>>> Jenna >>>> >>>> On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 11:08 AM Ziba Zehdar <ziba.zehdar@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> They wrote us this morning that: “A lot of what we do down here is >>>>> known as local practice - basically rules for the cataloging staff to >>>>> follow on a consistent basis, and the rules are unique to LAPL. The >>>>> practice here is to not include a 100 field when we cutter by title. We can >>>>> do a 700 added field, which will make the author search field valid for >>>>> patrons in the catalog, and librarians using CARL. I'll insert a 700 field >>>>> for some of the sample records later today (the ones with listed authors) >>>>> so you can test it out with an author search. Let me know - this'll likely >>>>> be the best option.” >>>>> >>>>> On Aug 9, 2018, at 7:51 AM, Honor Moody <hmmoody@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Also what Joshua said (just saw that!). >>>>> >>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>> >>>>> On Aug 9, 2018, at 10:50 AM, Honor Moody <hmmoody@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Violet put it much nicer than I would have (my original draft may have >>>>> included the phrase, “that’s fucking bullshit”). >>>>> >>>>> I think you could push back and argue that by following non-standard >>>>> cataloging practice LA public runs the risk of not being able to accept >>>>> copy from other libraries as is, and creates more work for catalogers at >>>>> other institutions who will need to upgrade any records produced by LA to >>>>> conform to standard practice. >>>>> >>>>> I’m not sure what classification system you’re using (though I’m >>>>> assuming Dewey), but there is no reason other than the need to document a >>>>> non-standard practice why you can’t cutter however you like (if the world >>>>> ended if a library adapted cutters to fit local needs none of us would be >>>>> here). >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Indeed, if you are shelving by title, I wouldn’t bother to class at >>>>> all, just use 852 first indicator 5 with $l for shelving title: >>>>> https://www.loc.gov/marc/holdings/hd852.html >>>>> >>>>> Good luck! >>>>> Honor >>>>> >>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>> >>>>> On Aug 8, 2018, at 11:30 PM, jenna freedman <leslzine@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> You could also use the example of xZINECOREx/Dublin Core as the >>>>> PARAGON of zine catalogery. >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 11:29 PM jenna freedman <leslzine@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I would try for the 100 before settling for the 700 if you can >>>>>> convince them that the fact that nearly every other library cataloging in >>>>>> WorldCat in English means they should follow precedent, rather than setting >>>>>> a new bad precedent. >>>>>> >>>>>> But Violet's response may help you keep things friendly! >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 10:47 PM Ziba Zehdar <ziba.zehdar@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Sounds like a plan! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 7:46 PM Violet <violetfox@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Let's wait and see if other catalogers have a chance to chime in >>>>>>>> tomorrow! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018, 10:41 PM Ziba Zehdar <ziba.zehdar@gmail.com> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Great! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I'll reply with this, what do you think? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> "Hello Catherine, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thank you so much for the mock ups! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> After conferring with the zine librarians that catalog around the >>>>>>>>> nation, we ask that all listed authors are put in a 700 field if >>>>>>>>> not 100 field please, thank you. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Best," >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Zlunioncat mailing list >>>>>>> Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org >>>>>>> http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> http://lowereastsidelibrarian.info >>>>>> http://zines.barnard.edu >>>>>> http://leslzine.storenvy.com >>>>>> http://zinecat.org >>>>>> she, her >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> http://lowereastsidelibrarian.info >>>>> http://zines.barnard.edu >>>>> http://leslzine.storenvy.com >>>>> http://zinecat.org >>>>> she, her >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Zlunioncat mailing list >>>>> Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org >>>>> http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Zlunioncat mailing list >>>>> Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org >>>>> http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Zlunioncat mailing list >>>>> Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org >>>>> http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> http://lowereastsidelibrarian.info >>>> http://zines.barnard.edu >>>> http://leslzine.storenvy.com >>>> http://zinecat.org >>>> she, her >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Zlunioncat mailing list >>>> Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org >>>> http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Zlunioncat mailing list >>> Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org >>> http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org >>> >> >> >> -- >> Hana Zittel, Librarian >> >> Books & Borrowing >> Denver Public Library >> 10 W. 14th Ave Pkwy, Denver, CO 80204 >> 720-865-1487 >> >> Email: hzittel@denverlibrary.org >> pronouns: she, her, hers >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Zlunioncat mailing list >> Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org >> http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Zlunioncat mailing list > Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org > http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org > -- http://lowereastsidelibrarian.info http://zines.barnard.edu http://leslzine.storenvy.com http://zinecat.org she, her _______________________________________________ Zlunioncat mailing list Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org

Late to the party on this, but totes agree with what’s been said (esp. “that’s fucking bullshit”). My first instinct was to say, well if you can’t do a 100 then use a 700 so they can at least be searchable through author search as a secondary access point. They are acknowledged as a author/creator of the piece and should be treated as such. The act of refusing to catalog a zine author as an author of mass market books is what keeps marginalized perspective at the margins — they should do their due diligence to try to correct that bullshit. Ok. Off my soapbox. Maybe not.... We need to keep good relations all our folks. But this is an argument you could use if they push back on adding the 700s — that having a zine collection adds to the diversity of the entire library’s collections, we should include zine authors in a searchable access point (other than just keyword) to increase their discoverability and access. Xoxo Rhonda Sent from my iPad > On Aug 9, 2018, at 10:50 AM, Honor Moody <hmmoody@gmail.com> wrote: > > Violet put it much nicer than I would have (my original draft may have included the phrase, “that’s fucking bullshit”). > > I think you could push back and argue that by following non-standard cataloging practice LA public runs the risk of not being able to accept copy from other libraries as is, and creates more work for catalogers at other institutions who will need to upgrade any records produced by LA to conform to standard practice. > > I’m not sure what classification system you’re using (though I’m assuming Dewey), but there is no reason other than the need to document a non-standard practice why you can’t cutter however you like (if the world ended if a library adapted cutters to fit local needs none of us would be here). > > > Indeed, if you are shelving by title, I wouldn’t bother to class at all, just use 852 first indicator 5 with $l for shelving title: > https://www.loc.gov/marc/holdings/hd852.html > > Good luck! > Honor > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Aug 8, 2018, at 11:30 PM, jenna freedman <leslzine@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> You could also use the example of xZINECOREx/Dublin Core as the PARAGON of zine catalogery. >> >>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 11:29 PM jenna freedman <leslzine@gmail.com> wrote: >>> I would try for the 100 before settling for the 700 if you can convince them that the fact that nearly every other library cataloging in WorldCat in English means they should follow precedent, rather than setting a new bad precedent. >>> >>> But Violet's response may help you keep things friendly! >>> >>>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 10:47 PM Ziba Zehdar <ziba.zehdar@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> Sounds like a plan! >>>> >>>>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 7:46 PM Violet <violetfox@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> Let's wait and see if other catalogers have a chance to chime in tomorrow! >>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018, 10:41 PM Ziba Zehdar <ziba.zehdar@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> Great! >>>>>> >>>>>> I'll reply with this, what do you think? >>>>>> >>>>>> "Hello Catherine, >>>>>> >>>>>> Thank you so much for the mock ups! >>>>>> >>>>>> After conferring with the zine librarians that catalog around the nation, we ask that all listed authors are put in a 700 field if not 100 field please, thank you. >>>>>> >>>>>> Best," >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Zlunioncat mailing list >>>> Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org >>>> http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org >>> >>> >>> -- >>> http://lowereastsidelibrarian.info >>> http://zines.barnard.edu >>> http://leslzine.storenvy.com >>> http://zinecat.org >>> she, her >> >> >> -- >> http://lowereastsidelibrarian.info >> http://zines.barnard.edu >> http://leslzine.storenvy.com >> http://zinecat.org >> she, her >> _______________________________________________ >> Zlunioncat mailing list >> Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org >> http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org > _______________________________________________ > Zlunioncat mailing list > Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org > http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org _______________________________________________ Zlunioncat mailing list Zlunioncat@lists.qzap.org http://lists.qzap.org/listinfo.cgi/zlunioncat-qzap.org