LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ISOJAC Archives


ISOJAC Archives

ISOJAC Archives


[email protected]


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ISOJAC Home

ISOJAC Home

ISOJAC  June 2003

ISOJAC June 2003

Subject:

Re: New item in ISO 639 - Southern Altai

From:

Anila Angjeli <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Mon, 2 Jun 2003 18:20:22 +0200

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (100 lines)

In the library community we encounter this problem not only in the case of a
language code change but every time a working standard changes. In this respect
this is not a potential problem but rather a genuine one. Our work implies the
application of a lot of standards and the way they are applied is part of the
policy of each cataloguing agency. In the Bibliothèque nationale de France - and
I think this is the case of many other great libraries - the modifications in
the standards are communicated as soon as possible and decisions are taken to
apply the updated standard. This means that the change is applied only from a
fixed date on.
As to going through all the records which have been processed according to the
old standard, it depends on the type of the modification required, the technical
possibilities of the information system to tackle with it, the resources bring
into play and the importance the agency gives to "retrospective" processing.
Generally, changes are not made rapidly in big catalogues, the number of records
being very important.

When the modification is possible by automated processing it is put on the
programme of work of the automated processing of the library.

When the modification is not possible by automated processing two cases are
possible:
- Either the number of the records involved by the modification is not very
great. In this case we go manually through the records and apply the
modification.
- Or the number of these records is very important. In this case the processing
is put in the programme of work of non automated processing of the library.
In the meantime - and this "meantime" may be a long one - two layers of
recordings will coexist in the catalogue (one applying the old and the other
applying the new standard).

The implications of not changing records depend on the importance of the
modification implied and on the number of the records concerned.

Currently, the retrieval problems encountered by the readers are generally
resolved with the assistance of the librarians who get acquainted with the
changes that have occurred. However we are aware of the potential risk of loss
of information involved by any change of processing, but this is inevitable.
I can ask the people of the SuDoc catalogue (Système Universitaire de
Documentation : the Collective Catalogue of the University libraries in France)
as well.

Anila Angjeli

---------------------- Envoyée par Anila ANGJELI/750/DIA/BnF le 02/06/2003 09:37
---------------------------


Håvard Hjulstad <[log in to unmask]> le 31/05/2003 00:50:50

Veuillez répondre à [log in to unmask]

Pour :    [log in to unmask]
cc :   (ccc : Anila ANGJELI/750/DIA/BnF)
Objet :   Re: New item in ISO 639 - Southern Altai



John Clews 31. mai 2003 00:47 >>

> Just out of interest, how do libraries in general get to know that
> ideally they should now go through all their records which have a
> "tut" code (for Altaic, Other), find the ones in Southern Altaic, and
> change them to "alt"  in order to conform?
>
> It's a genuine question, as "tut" no longer contains "alt."
>
> Is there some alerting process? What do OCLC libraries, and
> RLG libraries do? And what does OCLC and RLG do themselves?
> And national libraries? And large university libraries?
>
> And what's the timescale involved? And the resources?
>
> And what are the implications of not changing any records?
>
> All of those libraries must have this potential problem to deal with.
>
> I'd be grateful for some ideas on this: I don't have any particular
> answers.


The question is of course much larger than Southern Altaic. It is the
fundamental question of the values of "rest group identifiers". In the
current standard it is true that as of today the identifier "tut" no longer
contains Southern Altaic (as an example). This happens whenever a new
identifier is assigned. The standard doesn't stipulate a "transition
period".

With the new 639-3 this will be even more evident. The combined alpha-3 code
table will ideally not have any "rest groups".

This issue, and the implication for different applications (not just
libraries), needs to be looked at very carefully during the development of
the new parts of ISO 639.

I don't have any answers to John's question, just some more questions...

Håvard Hjulstad


Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

April 2021
January 2021
November 2020
June 2020
May 2019
February 2019
September 2018
April 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
May 2016
April 2016
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
May 2013
April 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager