by Monika Münnich, University Library of
Heidelberg, Germany
(final version, July 1998. Note: this represents a pre-press version of a paper presented at an ALA pre-conference, held in Washington, D.C., in June 1998. It is intended for internal use and is not to be further distributed).
German academic libraries acquire more than 60% of their books
abroad; 90% of this material is provided by Anglo-American publishers. The bibliographic
records of the Library of Congress and the British National Bibliography are offered in
most of the German library networks. However reuse of these records without considerable
manual and intellectual intervention is appallingly low, especially in the context of
networks with linked files. Former retrocon projects of OCLC and the German Library
Insitute showed the same results.[1] And vice versa the Library of
Congress came to the similar conclusions when trying to import German records to their
system as Sarah Thomas reported 2 years ago at the German Bibliothekartag [2].
So the REUSE projects emerged in a time when changes toward
harmonization with AACR not only were accepted but demanded. This was not only due to
resources rapidly getting scarcer but I think just as well due to the fact that the
Internet is a mighty international factor which we librarians have to keep up with by
using common standards.
At the same time in Germany the call for online alignment of
cataloging rules was at least as strong as the claim for internationality. So we
catalogers tried to serve both aims - which seems to turn out easier than expected or at
first feared.
Before I come to the contents of
REUSE and its aftermath, let me delineate the German landscape of rule making
committees and the main rule application forum: the regional library networks (LN) and the
Authority Files. In Germany all University Libraries (in most cases including their campus
institutions) and State Libraries are members of regional library networks. In addition
many special collection libraries participate. The serials are cataloged in the Serials
Data Base in Berlin and the regional records and holdings are imported (weekly) into the
regional LN.
· German Regional Networks (Verbuende)
· Bayerischer Bibliotheksverbund - Bavarian Library
Network (Munich)
http://www-opac.bib-bvb.de/
· Bibliotheksverbund Berlin-Brandenburg -
Berlin-Brandenburg LN (Berlin)
http://www.dbi-berlin.de/de/ibas/bvbb/bvbb_00.htm
· Hessischer Bibliotheksverbund - Hessian LN (Frankfurt)
http://www.hebis.de/hebis/
· Gemeinsamer Bibliotheksverbund - Common LN (of Central
and Northern Germany) (Goettingen)
http://www.brzn.de/
· Hochschulbibliothekszentrum - University Library Center
of Northrhine-Westphalia (Cologne)
http://www.hbz-nrw.de
· Südwestdeutscher Bibliotheksverbund - Southwest German
LN (including Saxony) (Constance)
http://www.swbv.uni-konstanz.de/index.htm/
· National networks:
· Zeitschriftendatenbank - Serials Data Base (Berlin)
http://www.dbilink.de
· Verbundkatalog: Union Catalog (Berlin, combining all
regional LN in one file - no active LN)
http://www.dbi-berlin.de
· National and State Libraries
· Die Deutsche Bibliothek - the German Library
(Frankfurt/Leipzig)
http://www.ddb.de/
· Bayerische Staatsbibliothek - Bavarian State Library
(Munich)
http://www.bsb.badw-muenchen.de/
· Staatsbibliothek Preußischer Kulturbesitz - Berlin
State Library
http://www.sbb.spk-berlin.de/
· National Authority Files
· National Authority File for Corporate Bodies at the
Berlin State Library (Berlin)
· NAF for Names of Persons (Frankfurt)
· NAF for Subject Headings (Frankfurt)
A little over a year ago the organization of cataloging rules
committees was changed. We now have
· a working level - the Working Group for
Descriptive Cataloging
consisting of 10 members representing the regional library networks, the Serials Data
Base, the German Library and the Library
Supply Center [mainly for Public Libraries] and the Austrian LN, and
· a decision level - the Cataloging Rules
Conference (i. e. for descriptive and subject cataloging).
German Rules Landscape
Institutions
Members
Members
Working Level
Decision Level
(WG Descriptive Cata) (Cat.
Rules Conf.)[3]
Bavaria (Munich) LN State
Library |
Gaby Messmer Gaby Messmer |
Dr. Friedrich Geißelmann Dr. Klaus Haller |
Berlin LN
Berlin/Brandenburg) State
Library German
Libraries Inst. |
Günter Franzmeier Günter Franzmeier Hella Braune |
Monika Kuberek Günter Hädrich Dieter Höchsmann |
Central+North. G. LN (Göttingen) |
Dr. Feruzan Akdogan |
Reiner Diedrichs |
Hesse (Frankfurt) Hessian
LN German
Library |
Sieglinde Korell Christa Zimpel |
Dr. Sabine Wefers Reinhard Rinn |
Northrhine-Westf. LN (Cologne) |
Luise Hoffmann |
Heinz-Werner Hoffmann (Chair) |
South-West G. LN (Constance) |
Monika Münnich (Chair) |
Dr. Marion Mallmann-Biehler |
For the Public Libraries: |
|
|
Supply Center for Libr. (Reutlingen) |
Petra Friedmann |
Albrecht Fischer |
German Library Associaton / Section 1-3[4] |
|
Ute Scharmann Peter Petsch Angelika Hesse |
Austrian LN (Vienna) |
Johann Winkler |
Dr. Wolfgang Hamedinger (Guest) |
Conference of German Swiss Univ. Libr. (Bern) |
|
Dr. Hans Lehmann (Guest) |
To complete the German landscape: Four library networks (Bavaria,
North-Rhine-Westphalia, the Southwest with Saxony and the Serials Data Base) will migrate
to Horizon at the beginning of 1999. This has been and still is a major factor of rapid
progress in rule changes, at least for rule changes that can be carried out automatically.
REUSE and REUSE+ were projects in which
· biblographic data were systematically analyzed in
several work packages,
· and codes that underly these bibliographic data were
compared.
The close cooperation of rule experts in the US and Germany made
the analysis possible. In this context I would like to thank above all Barbara Tillett of
LC and Glenn Patton of OCLC.
The close cooperation (and partly personal union) with German
rule experts was the prerequisite for realization of rule changes and harmonization.
As time is short I would prefer to summarize the projects from
the point of view of rule alignment, and not delineate the methods. The reports of the
project can be found under the following URL:
http://www.oclc.org/oclc/cataloging/reuse-project/index.htm
From the standpoint of rules, minor and major differences were
defined as follows:
· Minor rule differences:
· ISBD: a few alignments will be necessary
· Main and added entries:
We do have major differences in this context. But
regarding the online-world we kept the topic as minor. The Toronto Conference, though,
showed the difference. Thus the solution of the German Rules Experts might be of interest.
· Major rule and format differences:
Headings for persons, corporate bodies and titles are
different, in some cases definitions differ and in many cases entities do not match, a few
examples:
· Main differences in headings for persons:
Modern names are similar though there are still some
decisive differences:
· prefixes within a surname are written without any
spaces,
· and above all: identical names are not differentiated
by qualifiers
Ancient names differ considerably, as we use the Latin
or the original form.
· Main differences in headings for corporate bodies:
just to mention a few:
· executive and information agencies are not entered as
subdivisions (they are omitted)
· conferences of organizing corporate bodies are not
entered as subdivisions (their publications are entered under the organizing body)
· geographic names are always entered under the original
and official name, etc.
Within the corporate bodies many entities will not be
matched.
A comparison of corporate bodies in AACR2r and RAK has
been made by colleagues in Cologne based on a check of all RAK examples by LC colleagues
in NAF. See the URL:
URL: http://www.ocl.org/oclc/cataloging/reuse-project/comparison.htm
· Main differences in headings for titles:
In many cases in
RAK the title is not entered as it occurs in the item, especially as hyphens, slashes, and
other marks are concerned - spaces are added or omitted differently.
A major difference is the so-called
Ansetzungssachtitel - a kind of a filing title for e.g. volume and author
statements at the beginning or the end of a title. In case of author statements
AACR-catalogers sometimes enter under a uniform title.
· Multivolume records are treated considerably different:
we use hierachies and links, Ill refer to this in
the next chapter.
· Romanization in non Latin languages is considerably
different.
As a result of their work the REUSE working group proposed a
number of actions to be taken immediately in Germany:
· Active participation of German libraries and library
networks in international authority files. In this context differentiation of identical
personal names should be mandatory. The entities of corporate bodies should be equalized
as well.
· Changes in the bibliographic record section of RAK:
· The title proper should be the main title. The title
should be entered as it appears in the item.
· All form titles (as festschrift, treaties,
constitutions and Sammlung - collected works etc.) should be encoded. An
international standardization should be the aim.
· Multivolume works should be analyzed in a further
project (REUSE+). Within this context the hierarchy of separate records for subseries
(Abteilungen) should be abandoned.
In Reuse+ the
different types of representations of hierarchical bibliographic structures in the formats
USMARC and MAB2 (including the formats of the Goettingen and Constance Library Networks)
were to be analyzed.
As the final project report is written in German, with only an
English summary currently available, I will give some details and examples. In German library networks we create records for
the whole and the parts, i.e. for every volume of a multivolume work regardless whether
the title is distinctive or not. Thus it is done once in the central database as a master
record for all participants. Local systems reuse these records.
Thus we dutifully follow AACR in applying hierachies in
multivolume works:
AACR 13.6A: Divide the descriptive information into two
or more levels. Give at the first level only information relating to the item as a whole.
Give at the second level information relating to a group of parts or to the individual
part being described. If information at the second level relates to a group of parts, give
information to the individual part at a third level.
To import German data into USMARC should not be difficult as we
differ between parts without distinctive titles (so called Bandaufführung) and with
distinctive titles (Stücktitel). The last have the same record structure as monographic
series, the first could be imported to 505 with or without further information. The
difficulty is to extract the information for multivolume works from American records,
especially when using the tags 300 and 505, as 505 is used for other information as well
(e.g. TOCs, contents works). The information indicating multivolume works now can only be
retrieved by the v. in 300.
I would like to demonstrate this:
Structure of multivolume works in Germany
1st level:
Collective title record: (item as a whole)
= this record is always made, regardless whether the volumes have
distinctive titles or not
![]() |
author / corporate body
(links to authority files)
title proper
statement of responsibility
publ. place : publisher
notes etc.
2nd or further level
![]()
![]()
subseries volume record[5]
(if existing)
title of subseries
..
linkages to volumes
the volumes:
a) volumes with weak,
b) volumes with
general or no titles
distinctive titles
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
(Bandaufführung)
(Stücktitel)
authors / corp. bodies
authors / corp. bodies
(if existing, linked to authority file)
(if existing, linked to authority file)
general / weak title (if any)
title proper
statement of responsibiblity
statement of responsibiblity
edition statement
edition statement
publication year
publication year
physical description
physical description
![]()
collective title ; volume
collective title ; volume
(upward link to collective title record by ID-number)
Structure of
multivolume works - Examples
· Records for a multivolume work with weak title
(type a))
OCLC record - one record Record in the SW LN - 4 records
1st level, collective title record
001 ocm28254594 idn 2993008
... BND 3
100 1 aYarwood, Doreen. 200eYarwood, Doreen
245 14aThe architecture in Europe /cDoreen 320*_The_ architecture in Europe
Yarwood 359 Doreen Yarwood
260 aLondon :bBatsford,1992- 410 London
300 av.<1-3 > ;c25 cm 412 Batsford
... 574 mb (indicates the multivolume work)
505 1 av.1 The ancient classical and Byzantine world,
3000... --v.2. The Middle Ages, 650-1550
-- v.3 Classical architecture, 1420-1800 2nd level - 1st volume
idn 2993032
...
440 442 (2993008) _The_ architecture in Europe ; 1
445 The ancient classical and Byzantine world, 3000... - 1992. - VII, 166 S. : zahlr. Ill., Kt.
...
574 od (indicates that it is a volume record type a), without a distinctive title)
records for the 2nd and 3rd volume are equivalent
· Records for a multivolume work with a
distinctive title (type b))
In this case a monographic series which is treated identically as finite multivolume records in most German LN
OCLC
- 1 record
Southwest German LN - 2 records
Record for the collective title:
001 ocm13063011 idn 642075
... ...
100 1 aBrazier, Paul. ...
245 10aArt history in education :ban annotated .. 320* Studies in education
.. /cPaul Brazier ; introduction ... ...
260 aLondon ...,c1985 410 London
300 acii, 72 p. ;c22cm 574 se (Indicator for an - infinite - series)
...
490
1 aStudies in education,x0458-2101 ;
Record for the part:
vnew ser. 15
... idn 1395340
830 0a aStudies in education (London, England) ...
;vnew ser. 15 200*Brazier, Paul
320 Art history in education
335 an annotated ...
359 Paul Brazier
410 London
412 Heinemann Educational Books
425 XII, 72 S.
440 442 (0642075) Studies in education ; N.S., 15
...