[42] in ad-lib
Re: Two questions
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Sarah Mitchell)
Fri Feb 24 13:30:05 1995
To: ad-cat@MIT.EDU
Cc: rchall@MIT.EDU, rschmidt@MIT.EDU, hkennett@MIT.EDU, stavinsk@MIT.EDU
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 24 Feb 1995 10:33:38."
<9502241533.AA27977@MIT.EDU>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 1995 13:29:32 EST
From: Sarah Mitchell <smitchel@MIT.EDU>
Both Michel Ridgeway and Matt have told us that we only have
provisional records until we actually pull in authority records from
an external source, or, start to key them in ourselves.
>Bobby writes...
>> It's obvious to me some headings were system supplied and others were
>> input by GEAC; then, it appears that the headings were updated (e.g.
>> 040=DLC and the leader=Original entry)
>
>Actually, my impression from Matt's training was that _all_ the records in
>our authority file are provisional records derived from our bib record
>load. None of them have been edited in any systematic way (though a few may
>have been touched during the training process).
>
>The really odd part is that Geac, in its infinite wisdom, decided that any
>provisional authority record built from an LC bib (DLC in the 040) would
>_also_ get DLC in the _authority_ record's 040. This seems pretty
>misleading to me, but we did identify other ways of determining that these
>were not, in fact, LC records (like no 670, odd fixed fields, etc.).
>
>...Eric
>
>Eric Celeste / MIT Libraries / 14E-210A / 617-253-0633 / efc@mit.edu
>
>
