Fwd: Comments on DCRM(S)

[Robert L. Maxwell]

I am forwarding Judy Kuhagen's comments on DCRM(S) for discussion on the 
list. I am not forwarding the attachment, which is the same as the body of 
the message. If anyone would prefer to have the attachment (WordPerfect 
format), please let me know.

Bob

>Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 08:44:41 -0500
>From: Judith A Kuhagen <jkuh@loc.gov>
>Subject: Comments on DCRM(S)
>To: robert_maxwell@byu.edu
>X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.2
>
>Bob,
>         Attached (same text in the message below if you can't handle
>WordPerfect) are comments on the current draft of DCRM(S).  Jerry
>Wager has been forwarding to me the related postings on your list.
>         In the past when Jane and Juliet had shared their drafts with
>me, I sent comments directly to them.  This time Jerry suggested I
>send my comments to you for possible posting on the list.
>                         Judy
>
>
>Comments on DCRM(S) draft
>
>
>General comments:
>         Inconsistency in presenting MARC 21 content designation in
>examples
>         When giving MARC 21 content designation in examples,
>inconsistency in including "$a" (should always use MARC 21 style, not
>OCLC or another specific style)
>         When citing AACR2 rules, say "AACR2" since you also make
>reference to other  provisions in your manual.
>         0E has the general instruction to use square brackets when
>supplying information.  That instruction is repeated in some sections
>in every separate provision but then doesn't appear in some provisions
>(4B4 and 4B5 in contrast to the other 4B provisions).  Is it necessary
>to mention square brackets every time?  If so, do so consistently.
>         Consider general statement comparable to 0J in DCRM(B) ---
>then won't need to give in separate provisions, e.g., 3B1, 3B2.  Also,
>I don't see the exception in DCRM(B) 2B1 given in DCRM(S).
>         Depending upon your publication schedule, remember that there
>will be a revised AACR2 chapter 12 published as part of the 2001
>amendments (probably in early 2002).  Joint Steering Committee for
>AACR will meet in April and September 2001.
>
>
>0A.1.  Replace "catalog a work serially" with "catalog a work as a
>serial" and replace "treat monographically" with "treat as a
>monograph."
>
>         Last sentence may be confusing to catalogers.  Consider
>something like "For serials with volumes that have analyzable titles,
>such as dime novels or auction catalogs, consider creating monograph
>analytic records.
>
>0A.2.  Are you supplying content later or did you mean to delete this
>provision?
>
>0C.  Re:  your "Note."  Later discussion by JSC has not resulted in
>elimination of concept.
>
>0C1.  I think you're confusing "chief source of information" with
>"basis of description."  The chief source of information is the source
>within the issue that is the source of the title proper; for printed
>textual material, that is the title page or the title page substitute.
>  Basis of description refers to using the earliest vs. the latest
>issue; it isn't a matter of deciding which issue is going to be the
>chief source (your third sentence).
>
>         To what category does provision "normally, however the chief
>source would be the volume title page and preliminaries" apply?  The
>chief source is not multiple sources; for a printed text, the chief
>source is a single source.
>
>0C2.  Re: last sentence.  Since "title page" means "title page or
>title page substitute," you need to reword the sentence to something
>such as "If the source of the title is a title page substitute, give
>the source in a note."  Or, delete sentence because you have the
>provision in 1B1.
>
>0C4.  Typo:  7C15
>
>0D.  For the 4XX, you need to list the specific prescribed sources
>(listing in 12.0B1 changed in 1999 amendments).
>IA2.  2nd paragraph:  Is the option to omit contents notes and
>similar information?  If it is, I don't see place in the rule that
>says to transcribe them.  Or is the option to omit them without using
>the mark of omission?
>
>         I'm surprised by the use of mark of omission in the Jackson's
>Oxford gazette example.  Since rule says not to consider statements
>about earlier title, etc. as part of title proper, you're not omitting
>anything from the title proper.
>
>         The option says to include the former title info as other
>title information.  But, there is no information about what to do
>(e.g., give a note) if cataloger isn't following option.
>
>1B2.  I don't understand this rule.  The chief source of information
>for a printed text (seems to be the context for the rule) is the title
>page or title page substitute.  The "when" part of rule says both the
>full form and the initialism/acronym are on the chief source but
>remainder of sentence says to pick the one form that is on the chief
>source.  Do you mean to say "When the title appears in full and in the
>form of an acronym or initialism on the issue, choose the form ..."?
>
>         Example isn't a situation of the complete title appearing in
>the form of an acronym or initialism (e.g., JAMA vs. Journal of the
>American Medical Association).
>
>1B4.  The 1999 amendments to AACR2 now has definition for numbering
>which includes numeric, alphabetic, and chronologic, etc.
>designations.  So, delete "date or" twice in the first sentence.
>
>         The second sentence is unnecessary because the first sentence
>covers situation ("If the title includes numbering ..."  Just include
>its example as a second example after first sentence.
>
>         The third sentence repeats information in the second sentence
>and examples are the same.
>
>         First example for "Omission of other names, numbers, ....."
>sentences might be more clear if you include explanation of what is
>the designation since "14th" is not the designation for each issue of
>the journal.
>
>1B5.  Will there be a definition of "title changes" in DCRS or do you
>mean any change, even a minor one covered by AACR2 21.2A?
>
>1B6.  Do your materials have introductory designations such as "Part
>2" or "Series III" for section titles (what is coded as $n in MARC
>21)?  If so, the section title that follows that introductory
>designation is preceded by a comma, not by a period.  That ISBD mark
>of punctuation was added in the 1999 amendments to .A1 rule in each
>chapter of AACR2.
>
>1D.  In 1.1.E of what?  If it's AACR2, it's 1.1E.
>
>1E3.  In AACR2, your option is the rule (1.1E4).  If you want it to
>be an option rather than a rule, you need to have a rule for what to
>do if you're not applying the option.
>
>3A2.  3rd paragraph and examples (ending hyphens missing) belong in
>3C4.
>
>3A4.  Isn't 1st paragraph really info for 3C4?
>
>3B2.  Move perhaps to position as 3C5 since provision is for specific
>situation and 3C4 is provision that introduces giving both numeric and
>chronologic designations.
>
>3C3.  Is there a 3C3 provision?
>
>4D2.  In 3rd paragraph, in first sentence does "imprint field" mean
>the imprint data found on the item?  The use of term "field" is
>confusing there since the last sentence in that same paragraph refers
>to imprint field of the bibliographic record (i.e., 260 field).  I
>don't think "imprint field" is used in any other provision.
>
>4D4.  Are 1st and 2nd examples for serials that were complete in one
>issue or in one year?
>
>4D5.  Hyphens missing in examples.
>
>5B3.  Rule says to record physical units.  Can a serial with
>continuous paging be only a collected, cumulated, or reprinted serial
>that, per option in 5B2, has physical units recorded?  There is no
>"extent of publication area" --- I suggest the following wording based
>on AACR2 2.5B20:  "If a set of volumes is continuously paged, give the
>pagination in parentheses after the number of physical volumes."
>(Also, did you intend to differ from AACR2 where giving the pagination
>isn't optional?)
>
>5C1.  "Diagrams" is no longer in list in AACR2.
>
>7A.  Last sentence refers to 2B2 as one of the rules specifying a
>mandatory note but wording of 2B2 uses "may."
>
>7B3.  "Order of notes" paragraph:  add "numeric and/or alphabetic..."
>to the listing of areas.
>
>7C.  Last sentence repeats info in 7A about combining notes.
>
>7C3.  Indicate that the "other than the chief source of information"
>applies to nonprint serials.
>
>7C7.  Only place where DCRM(B) is cited.  Just give the information
>instead.
>
>7C12.  Typo:  should be "preferably"
>
>         Last sentence of 1st paragraph doesn't fit with the examples
>without explanation of display constant.
>
>7C14.  Last sentence of 1st paragraph:  Is there a default decision
>if cataloger doesn't know if info applies to all copies or only to a
>specific copy?
>
>7C15.  Typo:  should be "basis"
>
>A.1.  Where and what are 1.8 and 2.8?
>
>A.3.  In 1st sentence, "from monographs" should be "for monographs"
>--- this is my goof in wording I supplied to Jane and Juliet earlier.
>
>3.4.  In 1st paragraph, change "normalize" to "standardize."  How
>will catalogers know what is the standardized form?  First person
>decides and others follow the pattern?  Or, look at numeric and/or
>chronologic ... area in the record for the serial as a whole and use
>the designation term found there?  (For mono series, standard form is
>given in 642 field of series authority record but non-analyzable
>serials won't have series authority records.)
>
>         In 2nd paragraph, any guidance on how to determine the
>standardized form?
>
>
>Judith A. Kuhagen
>Cataloging Policy & Support Office
>Library of Congress
>Washington, D.C.  20540-4305
>202-707-4381
>202-707-6629 (fax)
>jkuh@loc.gov

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Robert L. Maxwell
Special Collections and Ancient Languages Cataloger
6430 Harold B. Lee Library
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
(801) 378-5568
robert_maxwell@byu.edu
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=