Patrick,
The added entry was not showing up in the opac display because the MARC record was incorrectly coded and incorrectly cataloged. In the case of this record, it had only a passing familiarity with MARC. Unfortunately, the PINES database is resplendent with very dreadful records that effect how Evergreen functions. We can get together at some point and I can regale you with all the reasons why (I don't know if you remember me - I used to work at Newton with Carol). Basically, the problems with the PINES catalog because of poor cataloging by libraries (prior to joining PINES), and the number of duplicate records created as a result, make it difficult to accurately understand and illustrate how Evergreen searches and displays. There are also some problems with authority control in Evergreen that also cause a few problems with searching author and subject. My understanding is that those problems will be addressed in an upcoming release. There are also some elements of the MARC record I, as a cataloger want displayed in the OPAC (cast lists, for example), but I don't have the final say in those kinds of local decisions. I have merged duplicate records in this search and overlaid the records with better OCLC records. If you do the search again, you should get a result set that is 13 records rather than 20. For the title in question, you should now see added entries for all people mentioned in the record as responsible for the item. Yesterday, I was busy juggling several different questions and problems and just answered one of your basic questions and did not follow your search. Hopefully, by cleaning up the records in the result set, some of your questions were resolved. I gave a much too brief explanation of 700 fields. We refer to them as author fields but they are actually added entry personal name fields. When we catalog, we create added entries for people and entities responsible for the item we have in hand. They can be corporations, individuals, editors, illustrators, compilers, publishers, translators, etc. A good explanation is in OCLC's Bibliographic formats and standards (http://www.oclc.org/bibformats/default.htm): Use fields 700-730 to provide additional access to a bibliographic record from names and/or titles having various relationships to the item you are cataloging. Added entries are made for persons, corporate bodies and meetings having some form of responsibility for the creation of the work. This includes intellectual and publishing responsibilities. http://www.oclc.org/bibformats/en/7xx/ Added entry is a term from card catalogs - an additional card to provide access to the title card. It is still relevant in understanding the hierarchy of responsibility for a work. Added entries in an online environment are additional access points to the record. The main entry is the person or corporation with primary responsibility for the intellectual or artistic content of the work or that shares primary responsibility. For multiple authors, the main entry is the first author in the list on the title page. A 700 field is for personal names, 710 for corporate, etc. You can look at the Bib formats and standards and see explanations and rules for input for these and other MARC fields. Another aspect of this particular title (Slipcover chic), based on the record and without seeing the item - apparently it is primarily illustrated with text subordinate to those illustrations. When this is true of a title, the illustrator is the main entry and the author of the text is an added entry since the person primarily responsible for the work as a whole is the illustrator. I hope this helps clarify things. Elaine ________________________________ J. Elaine Hardy Library Services Manager - Collections & Reference Georgia Public Library Service, A Unit of the University System of Georgia 1800 Century Place, Suite 150 Atlanta, Ga. 30345-4304 404.235-7128 404.235-7201, fax [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.georgialibraries.org -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Durusau Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 4:11 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-DEV] Introduction and Question OK, but that doesn't explain why the *displayed* record appears to be incoherent given the search term. If the record in question had returned the content of the 700 field, as opposed to the 100 field for that record, the question would have never come up. In other words, search the 700 field (I am not sure what you do about the illus. who was also listed when there is an author search) but return a *displayed* result that is meaningful in terms of the search request. Hope you are having a great day! Patrick
