OCLC BHL Synchronization Questions 2010

Questions for OCLC and Mike to get records synched in WorldCat

OCLC

Contacts:
Carney,Bill [carneyb@oclc.org]; Westberg,Susan [westbers@oclc.org]; Kozsely,Marianne [kozselym@oclc.org]

• Can OCLC batch load the general DLF tags and subfields for all our records? Are we free to suggest that our color masters satisfy BHL standards for digitization in the MARC 538 (rather than the DLF benchmark)?
• From what we've seen in a HathiTrust Digital Library record example, what does the "$5 MiAaHDL" refer to in the MARC 506, 533, 538, and 583 fields? - lipscombb Jun 4, 2010 ah, I think it's the MARC organization code, let's just confirm this. - cwcarden Yes, you're correct, it's the MARC organization code for HathiTrust: http://www.loc.gov/marc/organizations/org-search.php. $5 subfields usually delineate a MARC Organization code in almost any field definition.

- Pilsk What do you mean by the 538 having BHL standards? Is there something specific to go in specific subfield of the 538?
- lipscombb Jun 4, 2010 For Example:
HathiTrust Digital Library MARC 538
538 _ _ Master and use copy. Digital master created according to Benchmark for Faithful Digital Reproductions of Monographs and Serials, Version 1. Digital Library Federation, December 2002. |u http://purl.oclc.org/DLF/benchrepro0212 |5 MiAaHDL (- lipscombb Jun 4, 2010 no idea what this code means, maybe it's an OCLC thing?) - cwcarden see above

Possible BHL MARC 538
538 _ _ Master and use copy. Digital master created according to Biodiversity Heritage Library standards for digitization. BHL Digitization specs, month 2010. |u [[http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0ASGG0YxTuAn2ZGd2anZ2a3pfMmZzOXZybg&hl=en]] |5 BHLMR

• BHL has some records that might be considered minimal or sub-par that are for analytics. Some examples are given at the bottom. Are there any problems with OCLC taking these records?
• OCLC will determine Encl lvl? Record length etc?
• Where does OCLC stand on the 588? Is it valid now?
• Can OCLC share some of the basics of the Hathi Trust loads? We think we want to mimic them closely. Or give us a few record numbers to look at for monographs and serials?
• For Serials, our holdings information is not complete for all titles. Can we send serials without indication of the volume enumeration and chronological info?

Examples of potential problem records from BHL going to OCLC

BHL ID	7077	OCLC no.		title:	American journal of conchology Decided not to send;we have another record in BHL; the titles will be merged
BHL ID	8243	OCLC no.	01608205	title:	Kansas University quarterly
BHL ID	37858	OCLC no.		title:	Memorias de la Real Academia de Ciencias de Madrid
BHL ID	3799	OCLC no.	01200831	title:	A contribution to the ichthyology of Mexico
BHL ID	2426	OCLC no.	04872655	title:	A taxonomic and phytogeographic study of Brunswick Peninsula (Strait of Magellan) Hepaticae and Anthocerotae
BHL ID	3289	OCLC no.	03862595	title:	The Mylagaulidæ
BHL ID	2541	OCLC no.	35380672	title:	Ferns and fern allies of Guatemala
BHL ID	3101	OCLC no.	01209950	title:	Preliminary account of the coral snakes of Central America and Mexico

Mike

BHL MARC mapping BHL MARC Mapping Table

OCLC supply back new OCLC number - Synchornizing BHL with IA - the flow?

Tags to be included - OCLC provide? 506, 533 and 856 fields. BHL will need to provide the link for the 856 $u

440, 490, 830 - Send the original MARC record for the series fields (Do not worry about updated data that we edited in Portal)

BHL is DLF compliant

Bianca's analysis of: Yes we can be DLF:
Joe, Chris and I have pretty much decided that BHL, while it does NOT meet the DLF Benchmark for digital masters (created in 2002 BTW and is in sore need of an update but that’s another story), it still is ABLE TO BE a part of the Registry because:

“…the registry is not exclusive (it will record information about materials that…meet agreed benchmarks as well as those that do not…” from Benchmark for Faithful Digital Reproductions of Monographs and Serials pg. 1

Requirements for inclusion into the registry include:
1) Intent to preserve and maintain the accessibility of the described materials over an extended timeframe – Yes, BHL certainly intends to preserve and maintain the accessibility of our digital objects over time.
2) Digital objects are stored in professionally managed systems – Yes, BHL objects are stored professionally at IA AND are in the process of being replicated at MBLWHOI (this includes all metadata, images, and associated files as far as I know). Future replication hubs are planned globally as well.
3) The institution is committed to retain and preserve them – Yes, we are committed to preservation…in theory…