Having been out of school for just a few months, I’m quite surprised about how much the realm of cataloging has changed/is changing/will be changing. As the title of this post indicates, today focused on serials cataloging issues. Serials can use AACR2 or CONSER, Cooperative ONline SERials. CONSER (CSR), tends to find itself implemented in academic and research libraries so far. In the presentation and in the following examples, CONSER is part of the standard record application of AACR2 while AACR2 notes tend to go beyond CSR.
Here are a short list of comparisons between how AACR2 and CSR (CONSER) catalog records
|MARC field||AACR2||CONSER (CSR)|
|245||Abbreviation for title in 245||Abbreviation for title in 246|
|300||Required for all resources & needs various subfields||Not required for print resources or non-tangible resources (ex: serials only online)–>therefore, only for tangible items (CD-ROMs, etc.) that aren’t in print|
|362||State source of description if you are not working with the 1st edition||Always state source description|
|500||Note Source only if information is not from the Title page||Always note source of information; always include note about Latest issue consulted|
Unlike the APA changes, I don’t mind the CONSER changes that include more information in the 362 and 500 field. The bread crumb effect would make life easier than having to guess “When did someone add this info to the record and from what edition?” However, as print editions are changing from the default publication medium to an optional add-on to the electronic version, I think CONSER should stick with the “always” theme and just keep the physical description info for all types, perhaps just find a better way to describe electronic items instead of just leaving the subfields in the MARC record blank. With day 2 tomorrow, I’m sure I’ll have more info to share. However, now, with those changes in mind, remember to hold on to your hats, because RDA (the update to AACR2) will be out in June 2010!