MARC 583 for Print Archives - Focus GroupMARC 583 for Print Archives - Focus Group

Two scheduled meetings:

• Tuesday, 5 April 2011 – noon PDT / 3:00 EDT - Recording & Slides

• Thursday, 26 May 2011 – 10:00 PDT / 1:00 EDT

Today’s objective: review status of working group assignments, summarize key recommendations, identify outstanding issues, discuss timeline

ALA attendees take note:

• Saturday, 25 June 2011 – 4:00-5:30 ALCTS-CRS

Holdings Update

• Sunday, 26 June 2011 - 1:30–3:30

ALCTS session on 583 use

AgendaAgenda

10:00-10:10 Introductions Constance Malpas, Program Officer, OCLC Research

10:10-10:20 Review of Working Group ActivitiesLizanne Payne, WEST Project Manager and CRL Print Archives Consultant

10:20-10:45 RecommendationsKathryn Harnish, Manager, OCLC Cooperative Platform

10:45- 11:15 Outstanding Issues Emily Stambaugh, California Digital Library Shared Print Program Manager and WEST Assistant Project Manager

11:15–11:30 Proposed Timetable Dennis Massie, Program Officer, OCLC Research

NB This WebEx session will be recorded

New Print Archives Pilot team membersNew Print Archives Pilot team members

• Meghan Hopkins (Product Analyst, WorldCat

Collection Analysis )

Will be providing project management during the pilot implementation phase

• Dennis Massie (Program Officer, OCLC Research)

Will be guiding resource-sharing discussions, ensuring that implications for inter-lending workflows are addressed

Special thanks Special thanks

Metadata working group• Linda Barnhart, UCSD• Colleen Carlton, UC SRLF• Mecheal Charbonneau, Indiana• Ryan Finnerty, UCSD

Preservation working group• Kate Contakos, Stanford• Cathy Martyniak, Florida

Resource-sharing working group• Chris Bourg, Stanford• Dennis Massie, OCLC Research• Vince Novoa, UC Riverside

• John Riemer, UCLA• Phil Schreur, Stanford• Amy Wood, CRL

• Mary Miller, Minnesota• Jake Nadal, UCLA

• Matthew Sheehy, Harvard• Vitus Tang, Stanford• Tin Tran, UC SRLF

• Sherri Michaels, Indiana

• Mary Grenci, Oregon

Working Group ActivitiesWorking Group Activities

• Metadata – 13 May 2011 (Payne)

• reaffirmed recommended approach to record print archiving activities (583) in the Local Holdings Record (LHR)

• require minimum number of 583s per record with a minimal amount of data entry

• Resource sharing – 16 May 2011 (Massie)

• confirmed that detailed use cases are needed to evaluate workflow impact

• clarification needed on supplier/non-supplier status of Print Archive institution symbols; concerns about preservation value of circulating archive collections

Working Group Activities (cont.)Working Group Activities (cont.)

• Preservation – 19 May 2011 (Malpas)

• concerns about ambiguity in ‡l =“committed to archive” as preservation commitment (is archive a verb? a noun?)

• echoed concerns of resource-sharing group with regard to erosion of preservation guarantee if archive materials circulate

• proposed broader consultation on adequacy of existing PDA vocabulary, focus on potential need for need $a action and ‡l status terms

RecommendationsRecommendations

• Establish new Print Archive institution symbol(s) to identify the library or storage facility’s print archives locations

Institution symbols are critical part of resource-sharing and collection-analysis infrastructure

• Create GAC groups of Print Archive Institution Symbols to facilitate discovery in Connexion and Resource-Sharing

Print archiving institutions may participate in one or more GAC

RecommendationsRecommendations

• Create Local Holdings Record (LHR) for each archived title with 583 specifying location (Institution Symbol), print archiving program, archiving action(s), retention period, and holdings archived

Minimum requirement for print archiving LHR: commitment to retain expressed in $a=retained and ‡l =committed to archive [sic]

• Up to three 583 per LHR to disclose (1) print archive commitment, (2) condition and (3) completeness

Validated archives will need to provide 2-3 583 per title

Example: WEST Bronze Archive titleExample: WEST Bronze Archive title

One 583 created: retention only 

Retention 583: ‡3 v.1-v.34 (1954-1988) ‡a retained ‡c 2011-01-01 ‡d 25 years ‡f WEST ‡f WEST Bronze ‡j ORUM ‡l committed to archive ‡2 pda ‡5 OrU

Registers: holdings archived, print archiving commitment, term of commitment, location of archived content, print archive program, responsible institution

Example: WEST Gold Archive titleExample: WEST Gold Archive title

 Three 583s created: retention, completeness, condition

 Retention 583: ‡3 v.1-v.50 (1951-2005) ‡a retained ‡c 2011-01-01 ‡d 25 years ‡f WEST ‡f WEST Gold ‡j ORUM ‡l committed to archive ‡2 pda ‡5 OrU

Completeness 583: ‡3 v.1-v.50 (1951-2005) ‡a completeness reviewed ‡c 2011-01-01 ‡f Orbis Cascade Alliance Distributed Print Repository ‡f WEST ‡f WEST Gold ‡i issue validation ‡z reprints v.3-v.5 (1951-1958) ‡z missing v.6-v.7 (1959-1960), v.17 (1970) ‡2 pda ‡5 OrU

Condition 583: ‡3 v.1-v.50 (1951-2005) ‡a condition reviewed ‡c 2011-01-01 ‡f WEST ‡f WEST Gold ‡i issue validation ‡z tight bindings v.30-v.35 (1973-1978) ‡z missing foldouts v. 40 (1995) ‡2 pda ‡5 OrU

 

 

Outstanding IssuesOutstanding Issues

Preservation

• “Committed to archive” or “committed to repository” or “persistent deposit” or ?

• Required action: consult with community of adequacy of term or propose alternative for PDA by 10 June 2011

• Assess ‡l terms for condition and completeness review

• Required action: map WEST validation standards to PDA terms by 10 June 2011

Outstanding IssuesOutstanding Issues

Metadata

• Test of LHR creation

• Required action: each pilot site to create 5 LHR with 1-3 print archive 583 statements by 22 June 2011

• Test small and larger-scale creation and data load processes

• Small scale: 1-5 unvalidated titles from pilot WEST Bronze archives, CIC shared print archive

• Larger scale: condition and completeness for 5-500 validated titles from pilot WEST Silver and Gold archives

Outstanding IssuesOutstanding Issues

Resource sharing

• Develop use cases to test resource sharing impact

• Required action: develop detailed use cases for inter-lending (or deflection) of print archived content within and beyond WEST, CIC groups by 8 July 2011

• Test impact of maintaining holding under two institution symbols (print archive + original institution)

• Required action: address as specific use-case by 8 July 2011

Proposed TimelineProposed Timeline

Phase 1: Test Holdings Disclosure Features

By May 31: Distribute final version of proposed metadata guidelines to pilot participants

By June 10:

• OCLC assigns new Institution Symbols to pilot participants

• Finalize PDA terminology changes to ‡l (Status) as needed

• Distribute final metadata instructions to pilot participants

By June 22: Participants provide sample LHR records to OCLC

Proposed Timeline (cont.)Proposed Timeline (cont.)

By July 8: OCLC loads/adds sample records

July 8 – 29: Pilot participants assess search and display functionality in Connexion

Phase 2: Test Resource-Sharing Features

By July 8: Resource sharing working group develops use cases

July 8 – 29: Participants test resource-sharing use cases

Summary: Implementation ActionsSummary: Implementation Actions

1. Establish new Print Archive institution symbol(s) to identify the library’s print archives location or collection. [OCLC]

2. Create GAC groups of Print Archive Institution Symbols to facilitate discovery in Connexion and Resource Sharing. A given print archiving program may belong to multiple GAC groups. [OCLC]

3. For validated holdings only, update the bibliographic holdings statement(s) once validation is complete (i.e. 85x/86x formatted holdings or 866 summary holdings statement).  [Archiving institution]

4. Create a Local Holdings Record (LHR) for each title to define location (Institution Symbol), print archiving program, archiving action(s), and holdings archived. Include one, two, or three 583 Action Notes in the LHR as appropriate. [Archiving institution]

Proposed naming convention for PA symbols Proposed naming convention for PA symbols

Recommended LHR fields for print archivesRecommended LHR fields for print archives

004 OCLC number [mandatory] or 035  OCLC number [mandatory] 583 Action Note ‡ 3 Materials specified: detailed holdings to which action applies, should be same range

of holdings described in LHR 85x/86x or 866. Indicate gaps in ‡ 3 if known.‡ a Action: “retained” or “completeness reviewed” “condition reviewed”. Controlled

terms: PDA‡ c Time/Date of Action: Date action taken‡ d Action interval: when commitment expires or “persistent”‡ f Authorization: Archiving program eg WEST, ASERL, CIC-SPA). ‡ l Status: “committed to archive” [or “committed to repository”]. Controlled terms:

PDA.‡ i Method of Action: Validation level if ‡a=condition reviewed) Controlled terms: PDA.‡ j Site of Action Holding Location Code (HLC)‡ u Uniform Resource Identifier: Link to print archive program documentation ‡ z Public Note: For “completeness reviewed”, identify “missing” units or “reprints”

needing replacement. For “condition reviewed”, identify condition using controlled vocabulary (TBD) followed by units to which it applies. Use one ‡ z Note per completeness status or condition.

‡ 5 Institution: Archiving institution, controlled terms using MARC organization code 852    ‡a Location (print archives Institution Symbol) ‡b Sublocation (HLC) [other

subfields as needed]85x/86x if available866   ‡a Textual holdings (Summary holdings) if no 85x

ResourcesResources

Preservation & Digitization Actions: Terminology for MARC 21 Field 583

http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/pda.pdf

Registry of Digital Masters Record Creation Guidelines

http://old.diglib.org/collections/reg/DigRegGuide200705.htm

OCLC Local Holdings Maintenance Quick Reference

http://www.oclc.org/support/documentation/localholdings/quickref/lhm_quickref.pdf

*Draft* Guidelines: MARC 583 for Print Archives

https://docs.google.com/a//document/pub?id=1uJliwl41W00U1BISfIuib_Cah7NvXoknf9UP6yXBw48

*Draft* Recommended Revisions to PDA

https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1WbpPOQa2Nd8NjpuNg0hdzhBIMjHeQ2c85J0AiJUswx4

Thanks for your attention.Thanks for your attention.

Comments and questions are welcome: emily.stambaugh@ucop.edu

harnishk@oclc.orglpayne@crl.edu

malpasc@oclc.orgmassied@oclc.org