Minimal Level Cataloging (LTS Procedure #22)

Scope:  Minimal-level cataloging (MLC) is an abbreviated form of cataloging that gives limited bibliographic description, subject analysis and (in most cases) authority work. Materials eligible for MLC include low-need and/or low research value titles.

Contact:  Pam Stansbury / Laura Daniels

Unit: Cataloging

Date last updated: 10/12/2023

Date of next review: October 2024

Inputting
Guidelines for LC Call Numbers
Guidelines for Access Points
Guidelines for Subject Access (FAST)
Guidelines for Added Entries
LTS Statistics Code for Minimal Level Records
Historical Background and Policy
Eligibility for MLC
Exclusions from MLC
Definitions
Interpreting the Minimal Level Standards

Inputting

Any record input by LTS should be described according to RDA.  If the record is based on AACR2 copy input as MLC (Encoding level not blank) by LC, it is acceptable to leave the record as AACR2.  Modify the record in OCLC to bring it up to the LTS minimal level standard, as defined below.

Fixed Field Values

All other fixed field positions are optional at minimal level.  Catalogers may fill in such fields as Contents or Literary Form at their discretion, as long as they do not agonize over the choice.

Variable Fields

Use the following table to determine what data elements should appear in the record. All other MARC variable fields are optional for minimal level records defined by this procedure. If other fields appear in the Voyager in-process record, use judgment to determine whether to revise or delete such fields. The guiding principles are these:

• Focus on the data elements spelled out in this procedure as mandatory or mandatory if applicable.
• Accept what is present on DLC records to the extent possible. Do not delete or change DLC information unless it is clearly inaccurate or egregiously misleading.
• Do not agonize over data elements in a record. Make a quick decision in most cases.

Guidelines for LC Call Numbers

Classify items according to the LC classification schedules, unless one or more of the exceptional cases listed in LTS Procedure #11, "Shelflisting," apply. Use the schedules on the Catalogers Desktop. Add the call number to the bib record in the 050 field, 1st indicator blank, and 2nd indicator 4 (050: 4:).

If you find an actual LC cutter for an individual literary author, artist, geographic area, or subject, use it. Otherwise construct a cutter using Library of Congress practice for cuttering, as described in the LC Shelflisting Manual, available on Cataloger's Desktop.

In crowded places in the schedules, as may happen especially with literary authors, it may be better to keep an author together and a Cutter-Sanborn cutter, rather than splitting an author between the Cutter-Sanborn cutter and the LC cutter.  Use discretion.

Guidelines for Access Points 

Access points should be consistent with the structure of the LC Name Authority File. Note: it is not necessary for every access point to be represented by an authority record in the national file. 

1. Authorized access points for names (100, 110, 111; 700, 710, 711). Begin by searching the authority file and follow this process to formulate each heading:

• If you find an authority record, use that form, which is the authorized access point, and control the heading.
• If you don't find an authority record, search FOLIO (the public catalog search may be more effective) and use a form from an existing bibliographic record. If several forms of the name or uniform title occur, select a heading form in this order of preference: a full RDA or AACR2 record; another minimal level record; an LC in-process (Encoding level 5) record. Use judgment to select one of them; make a quick decision in most cases.
• If the heading is new to us, do a quick search of OCLC. If a form is found in other bibliographic records, use that form. Otherwise, formulate the heading using RDA, information from the item, and information you've discovered by searching.
• If the heading conflicts with a heading that already occurs in our catalog, resolve the conflict by making additions to the heading in your record.
  
• If the conflict cannot be resolved in this manner, create an RDA NACO authority record.

Note, the only instance in which you would make a NACO authority record is when the chosen access point conflicts with an access point that is already in our catalog and you cannot resolve the conflict without further research. 

   2.  Titles (130, 240).  If the item is a translation and the original title is known, supply the preferred title for the original + |l Language.  Follow the procedure in (1) above to find the preferred title or name/title combination.  Remember that RDA requires what we used to call “uniform titles” in two more situations:

• If the work is a complete compilation with one creator, RDA requires a conventional collective title.
  
• If the work is a compilation with more than one creator, you may need to devise a 130 if the title proper is in conflict with another title in the database. 
• Supply these titles if the choice is easy and quick.  You should check for an authority record for any name/title 100/240, but you do not need to create NARs in these situations.
  
  

Guidelines for Subject Access (FAST) 

Starting on December 1, 2014, LTS exclusively uses FAST subject headings on minimal level records.  This change applies to minimal level (that is, encoding level 7) cataloging only and not to full cataloging.

Consult LTS Procedure #127, FAST Headings for Cataloging for guidance on the use of FAST.

If your book would not require LCSH headings, for example if it is a work of literature by an individual author, FAST should not be applied.  However, LTS is no longer relying on keywords for subject access: even if your book's title says exactly what the book is about, in English, you still need to apply FAST headings.

Guidelines for Added Entries

You may assign added entries (7xx fields) if failure to do so would seriously impair access to the item. If necessary, assign up to two 7xx fields to cover the primary relationships associated with an item (e.g. an editor's name, the corporate sponsor of a symposium) or to bring out title access information judged to be important.

LTS Statistics Code for Minimal Level Records

Add an instance administrative note for statistics tracking. This is considered original cataloging. Minimal level cataloging statistics are defined by the o (original cataloging) from the structured note field and 7 from the encoding level field of the MARC Leader.

Historical Background and Policy

This procedure is based on the Library of Congress Minimal Level Cataloging, Monographs, Basic Procedures (CSB 42); Guidelines for Applying Field 653 to MLC Records (CSB 50); and MARC 21 Bibliographic Format National Level Full and Minimal Requirements, as modified for use in LTS.

Along with PCC (full), non-PCC full, class-on-receipt, and collection-level cataloging, minimal level cataloging is one of the options for catalogers providing bibliographic control to library materials. Catalogers may use minimal-level cataloging for materials that, in their best judgment, warrant that treatment.

It is important to remember that in using MLC, catalogers should seek a sound balance between the need for timely access to the material and the probable research value of the item.  Catalogers should consult with selectors generally about the kinds of materials that are high priorities in order to have a clear sense of when MLC might be appropriate for a given item or class of items.

Eligibility for MLC

Low-need and/or low research value titles:

For the purposes outlined here, an item has research value if it presents primary documentation that is otherwise unavailable, interprets a field in the context of current concepts, presents the point of view of prominent or influential practitioners of a discipline, or organizes existing literature in a field into coherent bibliographies.

Low-need and/or low research value titles are items that meet the definition of research value, but fall outside the definition of a major or substantial publication. Items that do not have research value as defined above should be considered candidates for MLC and may also be returned to selectors for possible deselection.

The number and varieties of low-need/low-research value items will vary from collection to collection, but may include materials such as children's books, certain state, provincial and local government documents, privately printed works, works on applied arts and crafts, and popularizations in all subject areas that have no useable copy.

In general, if an item has reached LTS with Library of Congress (DLC …  |c DLC) minimal-level cataloging, LTS catalogers are free to follow LC’s judgment and leave the cataloging at that level.

Exclusions from MLC

The following types of materials should always be excluded from MLC:

1. All reference collection materials.
2. Materials requested by individual users.
3. Major publications (both primary and secondary sources).
4. Substantial publications that may or may not be of topical interest.   
   
   

Definitions

The source of these definitions is the Library of Congress Cataloging Service Bulletin, no. 84 (Spring 1999), pp. 27-32. CSB 84 is also the source of the definition of research value provided in section III.

Major publications are definitive works, or a presentation of extensive, new materials, or a significant revision or reassessment of a subject or field.

A substantial publication of topical interest is an item that refers to contemporary topics, provides current information relevant to contemporary topics, or provides current information on long-established topics (e.g., the Dead Sea Scrolls) that are of contemporary import and interest and is likely to be used for research purposes by a specialist.

Substantial publications are those likely to be used for research purposes by a specialist and that do not meet the definition of either a major publication or a substantial publication of topical interest.

Interpreting the Minimal Level Standards

MARC21 and the tables above use three levels to differentiate between data elements (1) that must always be present, (2) that should be present if the information is available, and (3) that are optional. The levels are:

Mandatory: A data element that must be present in every record, such as the title (245) field.

Mandatory if applicable: A data element that should be present in a record if it is available and if it is appropriate for the item in hand. An example would be an edition statement (250).

Optional: A data element that does not need to be present in any record, but that may be present if local library policy calls for it or if the cataloger deems it essential for the item in hand.