From SharedBib

Jump to: navigation, search


Shared Bib Cataloging Guidelines

The State University Libraries of Florida: Guidelines and Procedures for the Shared Bibliographic Catalog were revised by the Bibliographic Control and Discovery Subcommittee of the Cataloging, Authorities, and Metadata Committee (CAM) of the Council of State Universities (CSUL) and approved by CAM in October 2018. Please provide any comments or suggestions to: Dave Van Kleeck Chair of the Bibliographic Control and Discovery Subcommittee.

Version notes

  • version 1.01: Corrected title page ("Catalog" not "Cataloging")
  • version 1.02: Edited responsibility statement to note approval by CAM on July 9, 2015
  • version 1.03: Corrected typo on page 27 ("(see section" not "(see section")

Sections to be completed

  • Display issues when varying series practice and multiple series statements with different indicators. Related content in 3.4.8 Local Series.
  • Proprietary Fields in Enhanced Records
  • "Each institution must report to a centralized location [TBD] data on products for which batch loading is used ..."
  • Add recommendation to move OCLC numbers on vendor records to a protected 599 field with "(OCoLC)" as the identifier.
  • Add to 3.4.8 Local Series -- How to record 490 fields corresponding to the local series access points. Use $5 and $9?

Shared Bib Problems & Issues Task Force

Final Report (August 27, 2014)

Prioritization spreadsheet

Valid STA Values

This page describes the valid status values for both holdings and bibliographic records.

Valid STA Values

Keep XX Codes

(added 10/19/2015)

FLVC has implemented $5 KEEPXX for protecting local or proprietary fields from being wiped out during WorldCat overlays of Aleph bib records. This replaces the use of $9 + MARC Organization Code for this purpose. It turned out that $9 was already used in Aleph to mark long fields that have been broken up.

When $5 KEEPXX is used with a valid 2-letter code replacing the XXs, almost any field will be protected. If you’re adding a $$5KEEPxx to a field, make it the first $$5 so that the field is protected. If there are multiple KEEP $$5’s, it doesn’t matter which is first. If there’s a mix of multiple KEEP $$5’s and MARC Org Code $$5’s, order doesn’t matter as long as one of the KEEP $$5s is first.

Below are the codes to be used for each university:

University KEEPXX Code

Related Proposed changes to the Shared Bib Guidelines


Attached are drafts for three sections I (Kim Montgomery) was working on for the Guidelines:

  • The Subfield 5 in Aleph – includes differentiation between the $5 KEEPXX, $5 + MARC Organization Code, what to do with Non-SUL $5s in OCLC records and in archival digitization vendor records, and an appendix with codes and actions. New 3.4.1 The Subfield 5 in Aleph (docx)
  • Proprietary Fields in Shared Records – includes an appendix of known proprietary field purchases as of December 2012, based on a survey done at that time. Proprietary Fields in Shared Records (docx)


To explain this further, please see the PowerPoint written by Kim Montgomery from UCF. Please read the comments below the slides to flesh out the slide text.


Data loading information can be found here: Data Loading

GenLoad Manual Update

The following MS Word document is supplemental. Due to the maintenance of the Data Loading section of this wiki and this section, we've put this document here. In the future, they should be combined.

GenLoad Manual Update - Aug. 2019

Experimental Links - Batchloading

Batch Loading Vendor Specific Pages (Experimental)

To submit a batch load event: Google Form

To review batch loaded events: Google Spreadsheet

To correct an entry (video link to Youtube): YouTube

Batch Loading Best Practices

Multiple Series Fields Cleanup

Shared Bib Records with Multiple Series Fields: Issues and Suggested Solution

Results Files:

Authority Review Set:

This set contains any OCLC records that contain 490 0# fields OR don’t contain any 490 field. Their Aleph records will be excluded from overlay. The following two files are the same in content. The first is a zipped CSV file and the second is already converted to Excel format. They contain multiple rows from the same Aleph Bib, but with different series data from Aleph.
* A = Aleph Bib Number
* B = OCLC Number
* C = Aleph 490
* D = Aleph 830
* E = OCLC 490
* F = OCLC 830
Caution, there is a known bug in the code so that when there is no Aleph 830, the OCLC 490 can end up in column D, as seems to be the case in the first 5 rows of data (excluding the headers).

Reporting Duplicate Records

In Dec. 2013, FLVC began centralized duplicate clean up for the SUL’s. As a result duplicate reporting to the Aleph Duplicate Spreadsheet was discontinued on March 1, 2014.

For monographs, duplicates will now be reported to FLVC staff member Melissa Stinson at Please include the Aleph Bibliographic system numbers and any other relevant information about the records.

For continuing resources, report duplicate records to SERCLIENT-L for continuing resources to discuss whether to overlay the record and so the other libraries can edit their OCLC holdings. The subject line of the e-mail should state the nature of the change (e.g. SB overlay) followed by abbreviations for the SULs affected by the change. The body of the e-mail should contain at the minimum the bib number and OCLC control number of the Aleph record to be overlaid and the OCLC number of the new record selected in OCLC.

Tools for reporting duplicate records:

Instructions for 856 41 Cleanup Project

FLVC sites with information about how the Mango ICONs are currently displayed in the wiki:

Shared Bib Cataloging and Display in Mango

Cataloging statistics via the ARL field in the holdings record

FSU's methods

Issues with the ARL Report

Problem: The report only retrieves the first of multiple fields or subfields.

  • Solution: Add the new field or subfield before the old one. See Appendix 3 of "Instructions for the entering data into the ARL field" for more details.

Problem: When titles are withdrawn and the bib and holdings records are deleted, the data in the ARL field is lost.

  • Solution: Maintain an archive of ARL field data for 'total deletes' before deleting the bib and holdings records.

Problem: Human error.

  • Solution: Review the report data for errors. Provide ongoing training as needed.

Shared Bib Cataloging Training Aids

SULs may share their local policies and procedures, training aids, instruction sheets, and guidelines examples here. Recommendation: upload documents to the wiki instead of Google Docs for permanence and protection from editing.

Instruction sheets

SB Cataloging guidelines examples

Cataloging, Authorities, and Metadata Committee

Voting representatives

Daniel Scheide
Chris Boyd
Rita M. Cauce
Amy K. Weiss
Jeanne M. Piascik (2021 co-chair)
David Van Kleeck
Jennifer L. Murray
Brian Falato (2021 co-chair)
Liza Campbell

Meeting Minutes

Meetings occur quarterly on Zoom. Links will be shared each time.









Other CAM-related links

Bibliographic Control and Discovery Subcommittee

see CSUL for more information (

Voting representatives

Malka Schyndel
Chris Boyd
Elaine Dong
Sarah Hess Cohen (2021 Co-Chair)
Peter Spyers-Duran
Dave Van Kleeck (2021 Co-Chair)
Susan Massey / Tammy Druash
Brian Falato
Liza Campbell

Meeting Minutes

BCDS Meeting Link Location

Meetings occur quarterly via Zoom. Links will be shared each time.

BCDS 2021

BCDS 2020

BCDS 2019

BCDS 2018

BCDS 2017

BCDS 2016

BCDS 2015

BCDS 2014

BCDS 2013

Working Documents and Supplementary BCDS Materials

3.3.3. Rules for the Creation and Maintenance of Access Points

Other Sections

Topics referred to the Bibliographic Control and Discovery Subcommittee

  • 01/14/15: From the Cataloging, Authorities, and Metadata (CAM) Committee
    • Best practices and instructions for batchloading as a separate document or appendix of the Shared Bib Guideline
  • 02/12/14: From the Cataloging, Authorities, and Metadata (CAM) Committee
    • Removing 856 fields for non-SUL links that require authorization
  • 11/13/13: From the Cataloging, Authorities, and Metadata (CAM) Committee
    • Determine specifics for removing OCLC numbers from non-OCLC so that the Report of duplicate records with same OCLC number is more useable
    • Address the possibility of global changes to remove the status of DO NOT OFFLOAD on bibs with protected Tables of Contents and Summaries
      • Identifying proprietary records with 520/505/970 fields
    • Provide more specifics on implementing the proposal on cleaning up 856 fields for display of Mango icons
      • Fixing incorrectly coded 856 41 fields
  • 4/11/12: From the Shared Bib Task Force
    • Report on 856 coding and icon display

Metadata Subcommittee

Meeting Minutes

Topics referred to the Metadata Subcommittee

  • 9/26/12: Statement to CSUL on the Need for RDA Implementation Assistance
  • 4/25/12: From the Shared Bib Data Loading Group. On the issue of locking records in Shared Bib, for guidelines on the use of a proxy prefix in the 856 field, and for guidelines on when to overlay an existing bib in Aleph.
  • 3/19/12: From Shared Bib Implementation Team. For bib tag use post merge, add to bib tag chart and possibly add 9XX & Aleph specific fields
  • 3/19/12: From Shared Bib Implementation Team. For proprietary records, need to review advisory group and establish guidelines
  • 3/19/12: From Shared Bib Implementation Team. Use of STA values other than Suppressed or Deleted
  • 2/20/12: the post-migration discussion of what to do with STA values should be referred to the metadata subcommittee because this has to do with establishing uniform practices across the SULs
  • 2/20/12: Discussion of whether or not there should be a uniform standard for the creation of “little” bibs that are created at the branches to circulate equipment and such
  • 2/20/12: Process for deleting records added in error submitted to TSPC for approval
  • 2/09/12: The Technical Services Planning Committee (TSPC) asked Metadata to take responsibility for "assuring approved revisions are included in the SUL Guidelines and Procedures for the Shared Bibliographic Catalog. The master copy of the guidelines will reside on the CSUL/TSPC Web site." TSPC minutes from the 2/09/12 meeting.

Outstanding issues from the Metadata Subcommittee's 2012 Q4 report to CSUL

  • Completion of the State University Libraries of Florida: Guidelines and Procedures for the Shared Bibliographic Catalog
  • Work with FLVC to resolve vendor batch load issues and incorporate decisions into future guidelines
  • Train university cataloging staff on the application of the Shared Bib Cataloging Guidelines once they are completed
  • The creation of project plans for FLVC to complete global clean-up of data issues resulting from the Shared Bib merge
  • Inform CSUL and FLVC about university library cataloging issues that arise due to rule changes such as RDA
  • Maintenance of a shared university library cataloging page on the Shared Bib Wiki
  • Provide feedback to CSUL on the impact of the Shared Bib merge

Historical/Archival Information for the Cataloging Page

Click on the header above for historical and archival information

Ideas for what is covered under "cataloging"

This list of issues and topics was provided to the Metadata Subcommittee by the Shared Bib Implementation Team. The Bibliographic Control and Discovery Subcommittee has retained issues or topics that are still relevant.

  • Guidelines/procedures for cataloging issues not already covered.
  • Value of keeping electronic vs. print records separate.
  • What is needed in the "union" view of the record.
  • Proprietary fields/records.
  • Suggesting bib. record cleanup.
  • Use of LKR and ANA tags.
  • Indexing changes (if any).
Personal tools