John, Richard, and all,  The Program for Cooperative Cataloging has 4 component programs.  Ideally, documents and training for all would carry the same message--our mutually-accepted standards underlie reliable records that we can share, but allow catalogers and local institutions appropriate flexibility in some areas.  

In actuality, the program documentation has been authored at different times by different people, leading to variations in application.  During the transition toward RDA, the PCC is working on revising older manuals and training documentation, hoping to harmonize content and format where possible.  In the future, as now, certain fields may be more strictly defined than others--if intended for machine or human. 

Speaking from my viewpoint.  Carolyn

Carolyn R. Sturtevant
BIBCO Coordinator
COIN/Cooperative Programs Section
Library of Congress
Washington, DC 20540-4320
voice: 202.707.4551
fax: 202.252.2082
[log in to unmask]





-----Original Message-----
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of john g marr
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2012 12:47 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: back cover or p. 4 of cover


Richard:

  There is a difference in this issue. "NACO" training emphasizes flexibility in the formation of 670 fields on authority records, whereas "BIBCO" emphasizes stricter conformity to established standards in bibliographical records.

jgm

On Mon, 14 May 2012, Moore, Richard wrote:

> John
>
> We're at cross-purposes on terminology. NACO is a PCC programme (as is 
> BIBCO), governed by the PCC Policy Committee.
>
> Regards
> Richard
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging 
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of john g marr
> Sent: 04 May 2012 17:26
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] back cover or p. 4 of cover
>
> On Thu, 3 May 2012, Moore, Richard wrote:
>
>> I don't think PCC has been fussed for a long time over the minutiae 
>> of
>
>> whether participants cite "back cover", or "p.4 of cover"
>
>  It's a NACO question, not PCC. NACO simply is more informal and 
> requires less specificity of notation form on authority records that 
> PCC/BIBCO requires of bibliographic records.
>
> jgm
>
>  John G. Marr
>  Cataloger
>  CDS, UL
>  Univ. of New Mexico
>  Albuquerque, NM 87131
>  [log in to unmask]
>  [log in to unmask]
>
>
>     **There are only 2 kinds of thinking: "out of the box" and 
> "outside the box."
>
> Opinions belong exclusively to the individuals expressing them, but 
> sharing is permitted.
>
> **********************************************************************
> **** Experience the British Library online at http://www.bl.uk/
>
> The British Library’s new interactive Annual Report and Accounts 
> 2010/11 : 
> http://www.bl.uk/annualreport2010-11http://www.bl.uk/knowledge
>
> Help the British Library conserve the world's knowledge. Adopt a Book. 
> http://www.bl.uk/adoptabook
>
> The Library's St Pancras site is WiFi - enabled
>
> **********************************************************************
> ***
>
> The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended for the addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this e-mail and notify the mailto:[log in to unmask] : The contents of this e-mail must not be disclosed or copied without the sender's consent.
>
> The statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the British Library. The British Library does not take any responsibility for the views of the author.
>
> **********************************************************************
> ***
> Think before you print
>

  John G. Marr
  Cataloger
  CDS, UL
  Univ. of New Mexico
  Albuquerque, NM 87131
  [log in to unmask]
  [log in to unmask]


     **There are only 2 kinds of thinking: "out of the box" and "outside the box."

Opinions belong exclusively to the individuals expressing them, but sharing is permitted.