1. Creation of publication patterns has proved to be quite problematic. Hamilton is leaning toward an OCLC practice of putting publication patterns in an 891 tag so that everyone can use the same pattern. Amy Carlson is researching the 891 approach. K.T. Yao has added the 891 tag to the UH shared tag table. K.T.'s revised version will be distributed with the Voyager 2000.1.3 patch.

2. Preparing for serials check-in.
   A lot of libraries would like to bring up serials check-in sometime this fiscal year. Members who had attended Voyager acquisitions training confirmed that serials check-in can be done without bringing up full acquisitions. Michelle said she would check with Thelma Diercks, chair of the Acquisitions Committee, to see if there could be some sort of training or education on how to set up serials check-in without bringing up full acquisitions. Michelle asked if it would be okay for non-Hamilton libraries to start searching for serial titles they plan to check-in in the shared database in order to select a keepx record and flag any duplicates. Hamilton representatives said it would be okay for other libraries to start working on such a project, but asked that libraries try, if at all possible, to leave UHM or LAW records as keepx unless they have used the latest entry (rather than successive entry) approach.

3. Deduplication of titles that have been handled both as serials and monographs.
   The group decided that in cases where some libraries have handled a title as a serial, while other libraries have handled it as a monograph, (and both have done so legally according to the cataloging standards), deduplication need only be done to the point where there is one monographic record and one serial record for the title, if there are compelling reasons to keep both approaches. If a library decides not to dedup a record because of a format preference, a 591 tag with the message "keepxser XXX" or "keepxmono XXX" should be added to the bib record after the 591 dedup message is deleted. (XXX is the library's identifier code.)

4. Michelle wanted to know if item records have to be created as part of serials check-in. The answer was that item records don't have to be created if issues don't circulate. However, you can't print labels as part of serials check-in unless you create item records.

1. Uncover. Zoe Stewart-Marshall reported that for those titles that UH Hamilton sends holdings data to Uncover, it may now be necessary to send everybody's holdings data. It would therefore be good to have everyone's holdings data cleaned up for the Uncover titles. Zoe could not predict when the next extract of holdings data would be, as Uncover has changed ownership and is being revamped.

2. Local MFHD standards. A document prepared by Sharon Ouchi, "Standards for Holdings Records (MFHDs) was distributed. The group reviewed what the holdings standards are for the shared database, particularly where the NISO standard provides several options. They agreed that in the supplement (867) and index (868) tags, captions should be included even though WebVoyage provides labels for this data. The group agreed that libraries can choose to use open or closed holdings statements, and that summary holdings without gaps can be described at level 3 or level 4.

3. MFHD examples. Nadine Leong-Kurio volunteered to create a web page of MFHD examples drawn from the UH shared database. Members agreed to send examples of specific situations to Nadine. Zoe offered to link the page to the SCCC web site.

4. Item record data. Because item records are the source of data for circulation reports and notices, item record data has to match what is on the item itself, even if that means that item record data and holdings record data don't exactly match. In the MFHD/item relationship, the only element that absolutely has to match is location. Voyager item records have fields for enumeration, chronology and year. Members admitted to some confusion over use of the year field, since the holdings standard defines year as being part of the chronology. Michelle reported that when she asked Ann Lorrish about use of the year field, Ann was rather insistent that the year always go into that field, rather than chronology. It was noted that data in the year field doesn't appear in staff-side displays such as the record hierarchy and the "get items" list. Zoe expressed concern that data in the year field may not appear on circulation notices. She suggested that libraries test how data from the enumeration, chronology and year fields appear on circ notices before deciding on where to put the data. [Note: Some libraries are opting to put all data in the enumeration field, since that is how it migrated from CARL.]

5. Scores with parts. Paul Beck asked the group if they felt scores with parts should be handled at level 3 or level 4 in the holdings record. Those catalogers from libraries that support music programs felt a level 4 description is much more helpful to patrons. The group agreed to use level 4.

6. 856 fields. Members asked if there had been a decision on where to put 856 fields. Michelle reported that the Steering Committee decided that urls for free, open-access resources should go in the bibliographic record, but urls for restricted-access resources should go in the holdings record of the library that licensed the resource. Michelle added that the WebVoyage Committee had decided they would like 856 fields in holdings records to use a standard public note. She said she would contact the WebVoyage Committee to get the exact text of the note.

1. Always search for the item being cataloged right before you add the record, to avoid duplicate records.
2. Always include magic numbers (i.e. ISBN, LCCN) present on the piece. However, only include the number in subfield a if you are certain it is correct.
3. Always check authority-controlled headings against the authority database.

The group agreed that it would also be good to have guidelines on when to add a new record vs. when to use an existing record. Sophia suggested using OCLC's guidelines. Zoe felt the OCLC guidelines would be a good jumping off point, but thought the group might want to modify them to fit local needs. Sophia volunteered to post the url for the guidelines to sccc-l. http://www.oclc.org/oclc/bib/fchap4.htm