I have asked Anthony Franks to have one of the staff of the Coop team compile the salient points that have emerged during these email discussions, and I will submit the resulting document to the Bibliographic Access Management Team, which includes head of CPSO. So you don't really need to duplicate your efforts, unless of course you want to be sure that your particular voice is heard. I will ask the compiler(s) to include comments through tomorrow July 15, as I agree with the person who said earlier today that we seem to be coming back to the beginning of the discussion.
The traffic on this particular proposal has been very heavy and quite impressive in relation to the points brought up. I understand that other proposals where PCC input is needed are in the works and in due course will be posted. I want to be sure that the appropriate decision-makers have the full benefit of PCCLIST's input. When whenever substantive discussion occurs on the list in response to a call for comments, Coop will continue to compile the results for me to share with other LC managers.
>>> [log in to unmask] 07/14/05 12:29 PM >>>
I was just reminded by an LC staff member that discussion on the PCC list
is considered discussion. If we wish our opinions to be considered in the
reformulation of the policy, we should mail them to:
[log in to unmask]
(Note that I do not approve of this working method, I simply advise list
users of its existence. From my point of view, those formulating the
policy should be following the discussion on this, the appropriate
discussion list, and including points made on the list with points made in
other means. But it's too late to ask for a reconsideration of *that*
policy at this time.)
Gary L. Strawn, Authorities Librarian, etc.
Northwestern University, 1970 Campus Drive, Evanston IL 60208-2300
e-mail: [log in to unmask] voice: 847/491-2788 fax: 847/491-8306
Forsan et haec olim meminisse iuvabit.