This article discusses the problem of bibliographic control in the large machine- readable databases that are replacing the traditional library catalogue The nature of duplication in these large databases is examined and a possible way in which it could be eliminated is outlined It is suggested that the main entry should be replaced by a manifestation entry This would enable a new approach to be made to the way in which catalogue information is presented to the user. Revised and expanded functions and objectives for the catalogue are laid down to replace those of Cutter which have been used for over a century Modern developments in bibliographic control make this change possible
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Madan, F. 'The duplicity of duplicates' and 'A new extension of bibliography' . Transactions of the Bibliographical Society, 1914, 12, 15-24.
2.
Verona, Eva.Literary unit versus bibliographical unit. Libri, 1959, 9, 79-104.
3.
Hickey, Thomas B, and Rypka, David J.Automatic detection of duplicate monographic records. Journal of Library Automation, 1979 , 12, 125-42.
4.
Wanninger, Patricia Dwyer.Is the OCLC database too large? A study of the effects of duplicate records in the OCLC system. Library Resources and Technical Services, 1982, 26, 353-61.
5.
Jones, Barbara , and Kastner, Arno.Duplicate records in the bibliographic utilities: a historical review of the printing versus edition problem. Library Resources and Technical Services, 1983, 27, 211-20.
6.
Ayres, F.H. , Huggill, J A W, and Yannakoudkis , E.J.The Umversal Standard Bibliographic Code (USBC): its use for cleaning, merging and controlling large databases. Program, 1988, 22, 117-32.
7.
Coyle, Karen.Record matching: a discussion. Information Technology and Libraries, 1985, 4, 57-9.
8.
Cutter, Charles A.Rules for a printed dictionary catalog. US Bureau of Education, 1876.
9.
Lubetzky, Seymour.Cataloguing rules and principles. Library of Congress, 1953.
10.
International Conference on Cataloguing Principles. Statement of principles adopted at the International Conference on Cataloguing Principles, 1961. IFLA Committee on Cataloguing , 1971.
11.
Lubetzky, Seymour.The function of the main entry in the alphabetical catalog—one approach In Proceedings of the International Conference on Cataloguing Principles, 1961. Organising Committee of the Conference, 1963, 139-43.
12.
Carpenter, Michael.Main entry. In Svenonius, E (ed.). Conceptual foundations of descriptive cataloging. Academic Press, 1989, 73-95.
13.
Seal, Alan.Experiments with full and short entry catalogues: a study of library needs . Library Resources and Technical Services, 1983, 27, 144-55.
14.
Tillet, Barbara B.Bibliographic relationships: toward a conceptual structure of bibliographic information used in cataloging. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, 1987.
15.
McNellis, Claudia H.Describing reproductions: multiple physical manifestations in the bibliographical universe. Cataloguing and Classification Quarterly, 1985, 5 (3), 35-48.
16.
O'Neill, Edward T, and Vizine-Goetz , Diane.Bibliographic relationships: implications for the function of the catalog. In Svenonius, E (ed.). Conceptual foundations of descriptive cataloging. Academic Press, 1989, 167-79.
17.
Svenonius, Elaine.Clustering equivalent bibliographical records. Annual Review of OCLC Research, 1987/8 , 6-8.
Layne, Sara S.Integration and the objectives of the catalog . In Svenonius, E (ed.). Conceptual foundations of descriptive catalogingAcademic Press, 1989, 185-95.
20.
Attig, John C.Descriptive cataloging rules and machine-readable record structures: some directions for parallel development. In Svenonius, E (ed.). Conceptual foundations of descriptive catalogingAcademic Press, 1989, 135-48.
21.
Library of Congress.Network Development and MARC Standards Office. Format for holdings and locations, final draft. Library of Congress, 1984 .
