Cataloging Problems Discussion Group, ARLIS/NA Conference
The Roosevelt Hotel,
Julia Wisniewski, Elizabeth Robinson, Library of Congress;
Kay Streng, Minneapolis College of Art and Design; Angela Falsey, Nathaniel
Feis, Art Institute of Chicago; Margaret May; Beth Kushner, Brooklyn Museum;
Lea Whittington, LACMA/UCLA student; Margaret Ford, MFA Houston; Marianne
Cavanaugh, St. Louis Art Museum; Hyosoo Lee, Cleveland Institute of Art; Gladys
Markoff, Jonathan Lill,
Minutes of the Meeting:
Before the usual discussion,
Sherman than began the actual CPDG meeting, bringing the group up to date with the goings on at the various cataloging-centered committees. For a summary of the Committee on Cataloging: Description and Access (CC:DA) meeting at ALA Mid-Winter he referred the group to the web at http://www.artcataloging.net/ala/mw04/summary.html. He also has published his report on the Machine Readable Bibliographic Information Committee meeting (MARBI) at http://www.artcataloging.net/ala/mw04/marbi.html.
He then addressed
the proceedings of the meeting of the Cataloging Advisory Committee (CAC) of
ARLIS/NA at the conference. This
included a report on the status of the revised NH classification for Artistic
Photography. This has been revised by
Lynda Bunting. ARLIS will likely issue a
publication of this to help standardize classification practices. The issuing of ARLIS guidelines for
architectural subject headings was also discussed. Other topics included the VRA Cataloging
Cultural Objects (available as a document for comment at http://www.vraweb.org), which is an AACR like
set of rules or guidelines for cataloging visual images, and the CC:DA taskforce
for rules for cataloging early printed monographs (people wishing to be
involved in this discussion were referred to
Then followed the now hallowed CPDG tradition of going around the room introducing ourselves and asking any questions our constituent members may have:
Lily Pregill asked
about the use and placement of articles indexing the $t in the 505 enhanced
contents fields. Eric Wolf mentioned
placing the subfield delimiter after the article. Heidi Hass clarified this by mentioning that
the article is then in placed in the subfield g.
Eric Wolf asked what
the ramifications of the recent changes in the Costume and Clothing and Dress
scope notes had been for the group, particularly the catalogers at FIT and the
Bard Graduate Center. He also asked if
anyone had begun changing these headings in their catalogs.
Hyosoo Lee asked the
difference in usage between the LCSH Design—Philosophy and Design (Philosophy)
as her authoritizing switched Design—Philosophy to Design (Philosophy) it was
agreed that this was done in error as the former is the philosophy of design
while the other refers to teleology. It
was suggested that she talk to her authorities vendor. She also asked about the usage for the LCSH
Art pottery, as it has a scope note referring to pottery of the Arts and Crafts
movement, though it is applied much more broadly.
Jonathan Lill is
undertaking a project of cataloging a collection of artists books in his own
database and was wondering what information was most essential for this
Janette Rozene asked if there was any way of easily authoritizing subdivided headings. The unfortunate answer is that there is currently no simple way to do this. Debbie Kempe mentioned that there are enough problems with authoritizing non-subdivided headings, citing an example she experienced when a recon vendor switched the unqualified heading Art with Adjustable Rate Mortgages.
Lindy Narver asked the group how she should catalog a donation of placemats with images of paintings on them. Suggestions included cataloging them as archival material or as realia.
Julia Converse asked about including biographical information in authority records when cataloging museum objects. Liz replied that this presented rules compliance problems if using LCNAF and NACO guidelines. Brian Mekis stated that the Canadian Centre for Architecture uses other fields for this information. Daniel Starr mentioned that the desire to include such information shows that we are coming full circle, returning to the desire to place the sort of information that used to appear on the header card of the old card catalogs.
Mark Bresnan (or some Brooklynite impersonating him) asked when the 041 field is used when a work is not, or does not contain, a translation (indicator 0). The group responded chiefly when a work is an anthology, such as a conference proceeding, or other collections of collected works published in their original languages.
Recorded by Eric Wolf