Thank you for sharing your thoughts regarding PoCo's recent approval of
the new CONSER standard record. In response to your concerns, let me
offer a few observations that will also serve to explain why I view the
need for formal PoCo voting as unnecessary.
This new initiative represents perhaps the most comprehensively
researched endeavor ever conducted by CONSER. Since August 2005, over
150 individuals were either directly involved as members of a working
group, review group, or as pilot project participants. Presentations
concerning the proposal were given at CONSER meetings and at other
relevant venues such as NASIG and ALA. There were two separate
opportunities for CONSER participants to formally offer comments --
first on the standard record itself (July 24-Oct. 1) and later on the
encoding level and authentication codes (Sept. 22-Oct. 15). The issues
you specifically raised on CONSRLST in early October and the ensuing
online discussion among members were also a valuable part of the overall
PoCo took into careful consideration all of the feedback received during
this year long development before endorsing the new CONSER standard
record. It was overwhelmingly clear in our discussions that moving
forward to the implementation stage was felt to be highly desirable by
the majority of stakeholders.
As you stated so well in an Oct. 6th posting on CONSRLST, "Regardless of
the immediate outcome of any PoCo action on the report, there are issues
that will likely continue to be discussed down the road, since
cataloging guidelines are never a static object." PoCo acknowledged
that additional work was still needed to address a few remaining areas
of concern and has charged the working group members to give all
comments received serious consideration and deliberation as they work
towards final resolution.
Just as the process leading to the adoption of the standard record has
been very transparent and widely inclusive, the working group will
continue to employ a strategy that incorporates broad consultation on
the remaining pre-implementation issues.
From: Kevin M. Randall [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 11:21 AM
To: Charbonneau, Mechael Dawn
Cc: [log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] New CONSER Standard Record Approved (fwd)
Mechael: Thank you for detailing the status of the Access Level Record
But on such a serious matter (changing the very basis of the program's
cataloging standards), I am very disappointed that neither CONSER nor
PoCo asked the CONSER Operations Committee for a formal vote on its own
endorsement on the Working Group recommendations, as additional
information for PoCo to consider in its deliberations. The introduction
to the summary comments (sent out by Les Hawkins on Oct. 24, 2006)
implies a much higher level of agreement with the overall proposal than
appears to be backed up by the compiled comments, I am very curious as
to what the entire OpCo's sense on the matter (and details) might be.
OpCo, as a group, gave general positive response to only a presentation
of a draft proposal, and has not met since then.
At this point, I respectfully request that the entire OpCo be given a
larger role in resolving the more significant issues raised during the
comment period, such as by having formal votes on proposals regarding
individual items. (Two specific issues I will mention at the moment,
and which are addressed in the summary comment introduction, are uniform
titles and encoding levels.)
Kevin M. Randall
Head of Serials Cataloging
Northwestern University Library
1970 Campus Drive
Evanston, IL 60208-2300
email: [log in to unmask]
phone: (847) 491-2939
fax: (847) 491-4345
At 07:30 AM 11/20/2006, Les Hawkins wrote:
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 08:00:45 -0500
>From: "Charbonneau, Mechael Dawn" <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: [PCCLIST] New CONSER Standard Record Approved
>I am pleased to announce that the PCC Policy Committee has endorsed the
>recommendations of the final reports submitted by the Access Level
>Record for Serials Working Group and the Working Group on
>Authentication Codes and Encoding Levels for Serials and Integrating
>Resources. The implementation date for the new CONSER standard record
>has been set for February 1, 2007. Many thanks to all of the Working
>Group members for their outstanding work throughout this process.
>PoCo wants to assure that the recommendations are implemented in the
>spirit that they were offered by the working groups, namely, to provide
>in an effective and timely manner a record that consistently ensures
>identification of and access to a serial title. To that end, the
>Working Group has defined the set of required elements needed in every
>CONSER standard record. All other elements are optional, but not
>precluded, and can be added as needed based on cataloger's judgment.
>PoCo recognizes that the comments received during the review period
>identified some areas where additional work is needed to resolve
>conflicting instructions or clarify some ambiguities. The PoCo has
>charged the Working Group to review the comments and resolve those
>problems, and to work with CPSO to assure that rule interpretations are
>in place for those recommendations which are not fully compliant with
>current AACR2 practice (most of which anticipate upcoming RDA changes).
>Staff in CPSO that serve on the JSC can also help assure that the new
>CONSER standard will be compatible with RDA.
>Members of the original working group will be asked to work on
>resolving issues raised during the comment period.
>The co-chairs Regina Reynolds (LC) and Diane Boehr (NLM), will meet
>with Barbara Tillett (CPSO) to determine what AACR2 LCRIs are needed.
>The documentation produced by the Working Group provides a base
>foundation for the new standard. Work has begun on a document which
>merges required record elements with succinct cataloging instructions.
>This document will reflect the decisions that the working group makes
>in resolving some of the outstanding ambiguities or conflicts, will
>have additional appendices with examples, guidelines for working with
>copy, and other tools, and will link to existing sections of CONSER
>documentation where applicable.
>Melissa Beck (UCLA), a member of the working group, has agreed to
>develop training materials for the CONSER standard record that could be
>used in face-to-face workshop settings, adaptable to delivery in an
>online format, and made available for all by downloading on the CONSER
>web site. A new SCCTP module will also be developed based on these
>training materials. A preliminary training session is already planned
>for ALA Midwinter 2007, during the Monday afternoon meeting of the
>ALCTS Continuing Resources Cataloging Committee.
>Mechael D. Charbonneau
>PoCo Chair, 2007