LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for PCCTG1 Archives


PCCTG1 Archives

PCCTG1 Archives


PCCTG1@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


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

PCCTG1 Home

PCCTG1 Home

PCCTG1  October 2003

PCCTG1 October 2003

Subject:

Re: STOP: New version of draft

From:

Hugh Taylor <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Fri, 17 Oct 2003 07:30:56 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (84 lines)

A few thoughts on the draft. I'll concentrate on the more "serious" points,
as I see them - in any case, I'm conscious that American English and
English English are almost two separate languages, so it's a little
difficult for me to try to deal with style issues.

I think we may need to look at the order of the bullets in the summary of
recommendations compared with the order of the main section headings that
follow. Should they match? Should the wording of the summary of
recommendations be lifted directly from the text that follows, or is it ok
for them to have a life of their own (so long as they don't contradict each
other, of course!)?

Membership benefits. Para. 1. I didn't like the idea that we were keeping
the "best" bits for members, so perhaps add "or developed further" after
"reserved" here.

Next para. "Utility-based submission ... should be developed with the
cooperation of OCLC, RLG and the Library of Congress and should be a
privilege ..."

Later on in the same para - the reference to macros is almost certainly
OCLC-specific (I have little to do with OCLC, so can't be sure), so perhaps
add "or record generation software" after "macros"?

Next para. Add after "quality proposal preparation": "and delivery of
records in MARC format already validated by the utilities". I see this to
be important - one of the benefits must be that the utilities will be
delivering MARC records ready for loading into LC's Voyager system that are
as "reliable" or "safe" (in a technical sense) as the NACO records they
load.

Final sentence of that para. "Similarly, future ... task group recommends
for future consideration."

Responsibilities of membership. 2nd para. I feel this para. needs expanding
a bit. I've noted down, amongst the issues that would need to be considered
        variety of backgrounds of Members
        level of experience
        responsibility of members to identify training requirements

In the next para. perhaps there could be a reference to the consultant's
report at the spot where we're repeating the problems that LC staff face in
dealing with some of the less able contributors.  A quote even (means we're
not the ones dishing out the criticism....).

Training. Paras on "Workshops at conferences" and "Institutional training".
Couldn't see any fundamental difference between these two paras - they
seemed to be saying pretty well the same thing. If so, could they be
merged?

Penultimate para of this section needs redrafting to a more impersonal
style (I realise Jimmy was desperate to have a draft for mailing before the
end of my working day!).

And the final para here duplicates some of what's gone before.

Processes. 1st para. Again, the end of this para repeats some of what was
said in the section on Membership benefits.

Next para. Do we want to add complaints about lack of feedback to the list
of issues at the beginning of this para?

I feel the para beginning "Librarians preparing subject authority..." is
the beginning of a new section, but I haven't managed to come up with a
heading for this!

The reference to the PCC TG on Internat. Participation must be to the
interim report, I think.

Good work, Jimmie. Sooner you than me!

Best wishes,

Hugh
--
Hugh Taylor
Head, Collection Development and Description
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB3 9DR, England

email: [log in to unmask]   fax: +44 (0)1223 333160
phone: +44 (0)1223 333069 (with voicemail) or
phone: +44 (0)1223 333000 (ask for pager 036)

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

May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
August 2019
July 2019
May 2019
April 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
October 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
December 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
June 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
July 2000

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager