We've started pulling the books off the shelves and getting a hold of their records within OCLC. With quite a good many number of books done, we're really starting to get a sense of what the physical shelves look like organized, and trends are being recognized. Exciting! We're also putting the books back onto the shelves with added info. such as: LC call #, title, author, pertinent info. in the 7XX field, OCLC #, etc... This, we are doing in anticipation of the new database that is being formulated as a collaboration between ourselves and the museum staff. I am really starting to think about the Access database and what form it is going to take....Granted, conceptually, this is really only in its infancy right now. We have several considerations that have yet to work themselves out...
We have discussed the need to tailor the new DB so that it is not only comprehensive, functional, and efficiently searchable, but a tool the museum staff is able to effectively use. It has to be one where information is cross-linked and referable. This is all possible within Access, it's just a matter of including enough information so that nothing is left out. This is a tricky bit, what with books about art and artists, published by certain museums or galleries, and with contributions by so and so, introductions, joint authorships, etc.. All of these should be and will be searchable under the new DB. If a person wants to search for anything in the collection published by/associated with/exhibited at - the Virginia Museum of Art - that will be possible. For all intents and purposes, this system can and will, indeed, be considered something of a "hybrid".
One issue we've started to encounter is that, given a number of books that have been entered into the OCLC system, some of these have been cataloged in England, Germany, Australia, or some other country. They are, therefore, not necessarily utilizing the same class. system and do not contain LC call #s. Where this is the case, we endevor to look to LC itself to provide information and an alternative LCCN. We are able to then make note of this for future reference, when the important task of going back to access the record will need to be done.
Another quandry occurs when there is a book, as Lauren has stated, that is completely in a foreign language and who's statement of responsibility is, unfortunately to our eyes, unusable. Other examples include those items in the library that are corporate in nature, in a foreign language, and not reallly in book form at all. They are more like catalogs In these instances, where no OCLC or LCCN reference is available, where no cataloger has gotten their hands on the item and given it a proverbial place in the world, I can only assume that we will somehow have a hand in this very task. We will have to, at some level, because it will need to fit into our system somewhere - so that it can be found. How this formulates, so that it fits into both the museum staff's vision and is standardized enough to be included in an OPAC is the challenge that we are working toward achieving with our work...
Today's meeting with Will Real was very productive; with many thanks to Rachel Delphia, we have a new and improved database which will implement the following organizational schema:
