[736] in ad-lib
Additional Holdings created simply by re-filing record
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (gyoung@MIT.EDU)
Wed May 31 14:34:03 1995
From: gyoung@MIT.EDU
To: w.chow@geac.com, m.ridgeway@geac.com
Cc: ad-cat@MIT.EDU, advancecirc-lib@MIT.EDU, acq2@MIT.EDU, opac-lib@MIT.EDU,
bog-lib@MIT.EDU
Date: Wed, 31 May 1995 14:33:46 EDT
Wegan -
I'm submitting this to the LAD since we haven't gotten any
substantive response to date.
The problem: On certain bibliographic records simply retrieving
a bib record in cataloguing and then re-filing it results in "phantom"
holdings being created. Our cataloguers have spent a great deal of time
trying to track it down. It does seem to have some relation to the 049
$c and the Authorities file. (See the message at the bottom.) It
happens with certain records and not others. We have tried to run
various theories and none seem to create a particularly consistent
explanation.
Michel -
Cataloguing folks consider this a drop-dead bug. We are NOT
getting any sort of reasonable turn-around on this or any other problems
we have submitted for resolution or questions we have asked for a month
now. This is getting to be unacceptable. When Weegan fixed the problem
with the notices he suggested to me that it was the result of
deficiencies with the original installation and that all would be well
when we got our 2nd GMA. Again, this is unacceptable. We can only test
the system we have now. Until the problems with the current system are
dealt with I can not recommend that we proceed.
We will not install or test the 2nd GMA until we get some
responses to our outstanding problems and requests and can demonstrate
that the system will perform substantially as advertised without
impairing the ability of our staff to perform their work efficiently.
-- Grant Young, MIT LIbraries Systems Office
------- Forwarded Message
Subject: Son of Spurious Add'l. Holdings
Date: Tue, 30 May 1995 14:59:31 EDT
I've found that I can cause a record that was not exhibiting the
phantom holding phenomenon to do so by adding a $c to the 049 field.
It appears from my brief sampling that records without 049 $c's are
not causing the phantoms to appear; can others confirm or deny?
Very lifelike, Walter
------- End of Forwarded Message
------- Forwarded Message
To: ad-cat@MIT.EDU
Subject: Spurious holdings forever
Date: Wed, 31 May 1995 11:17:53 EDT
From: Jo Lynne Byrd <jbyrd@MIT.EDU>
Since the currently popular suspicion is that an 049 $c plus
re-indexing of the bib record creates phantom holdings, I tried a
further test.
I found a personal author (author A) who was attached to only one bib
record, with that bib record having an 049 $c.
I made Author A a cross reference on the authority record for Author
B. On the bib record, I changed the personal name heading from Author
A to Author B.
After filing the bib record, there were phantom holdings.
***Notice I said plural holdings. Everytime experiment I had
conducted so far resulted in two phantom holdings.***
I wondered what would happen if I didn't involve the authority file.
I found another bib record with an 049 $c. I changed Author C on the
bib record to another legitimate author, Author D. I filed the bib
record and got *one* phantom holding.
So it would seem that if only the bib file is involved you get one
phantom holding; if the authority file and the bib file are involved
you get two phantom holdings.
Jo
------- End of Forwarded Message
