Message-Id: <mailto:199407282215.RAA24934@library.wustl.edu> Date: Thu, 28 Jul 1994 15:02:21 -0500 From: "Stephen J. Fletcher" <mailto:sjfletch@INDYNET.INDY.NET> Subject: 655 VS 650 in VM cataloging To: Multiple recipients of list IMAGELIB <mailto:IMAGELIB@ARIZVM1.BITNET>
We at the Indiana Historical Soceity are developing policies and procedures for cataloging visual material using OCLC. Currently, published and archives/manuscript material are being cataloged using BKS and AMC formats respectively. We have decide to use OCLC's VM format. We decided to use VM over AMC mainly because of the versatility of the 007 field in VM, which in AMC is restricted to microforms.We have a question for which we would like to solicite input from the field:
How are you using 655 Genre/Form vis-a-vis placing genre/form information in tag 650? OCLC generates the print constant "Genre:" before the search term meaning that cards for, say "Pictorialism" are placed in the card catalog (we aren't on-line yet) under "G" for "Genre--Pictorialism," not "P" for pictorialism. Researchers and staff therefore have to know or remember that you look under "Genre." This can be solved by using the 650 field rather than 655, because LCSH has proclaimed "Pictorialism" an acceptable subject heading.
What advantages do you exploit in using 655 rather than 650 for this type of problem? What are the pitfalls of not using 655?
Stephen J. Fletcher <mailto:SJFLETCH@INDY.NET> Curator of Visual Collections Indiana Historical Society 315 W Ohio St Indianapolis IN 46202 317-232-1879 317-233-3109 (fax)