Dear all,
The editors of module 22 have been asked to address, even in a preliminary way, updating AACR2 records. We've scope this out and are beginning.
Steven
-------------------------------
Steven Riel
Manager of Serials Cataloging
Information and Technical Services
Harvard Library
625 Massachusetts Ave.
Cambridge, MA 02139 U.S.A.
Voice: 617-496-5981
Fax: 617-496-3013
Email: [log in to unmask]
-----Original Message-----
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ed Jones
Sent: Friday, July 26, 2013 6:38 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCTG1] Updating examples in the CCM
I agree with Steve. Best to put AACR2 in module 22 with its predecessor codes and treat the problems of updating older records in one place.
Ed
Ed Jones
Associate Director, Assessment and Technical Services National University Library
9393 Lightwave Avenue
San Diego, California 92123-1447
+1 858 541 7920 (voice)
+1 858 541 7997 (fax)
http://national.academia.edu/EdJones
-----Original Message-----
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Steven C Shadle
Sent: Friday, July 26, 2013 3:26 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCTG1] Updating examples in the CCM
Actually, I had a similar thought about where to document how to handle copy. CCM Part 2 (Adopting Records) has two modules:
* Module 21: Modifying Records
* Module 22: Interpreting pre-AACR2 Serial Cataloging Records
and it seems to me either editing module 21 or adding a module for things like:
* hybrid-record practice
* considerations in deciding to leave A2 copy as is vs. recataloging to RDA
* etc.
would find a useful home in this part. Don't know whether the module editors already have that assignment but might make sense to centralize that kind of thing there and focus module 34 on original/copy (unless there are specifical legal examples or practices that are useful to document in module 34). --Steve
Steve Shadle/Serials Access Librarian [log in to unmask]
Box 352900 - University of Washington Libraries
Seattle, WA 98195-2900 Phone: (206) 685-3983
On Fri, 26 Jul 2013, Dale Swensen wrote:
>
> Here’s a question for a Friday afternoon:
>
>
>
> As I was working through my assigned sections of Module 34, Legal
> serials, I was starting to revise one of our examples (which are all
> pre-RDA), and it occurred to me that that may not always be the
> appropriate thing to do. For one thing, Module 34 has as much to do
> with adaptive cataloging as original and our examples are older
> records that largely fall into categories where catalogers are likely to find existing copy that is not RDA when they search for a resource in OCLC. This raises some interesting issues:
>
> · Should our examples be recataloged to comply with RDA (e.g.
> abbreviations spelled out, extent dropped from the 300 field if the
> resource is incomplete, etc.)
>
> · What about the corresponding records in WorldCat, do they need to be updated too?
>
> · I know there have been lots of discussions on recataloging
> to RDA—when you can, when you shouldn’t, who should do it, etc.,
> etc.—but are we recommending this now? Or is it still okay (or even
> advisable) in some situations to leave records that were up-to-standard when created as they are?
>
>
>
> What do you all think? I guess this is probably not as relevant an
> issue to you folks who are working on modules in part 1 that relate to
> original cataloging. I would think that certainly your examples ought to be RDA since we’re talking original.
>
>
>
> I’d love to hear your views, but don’t let this spoil your weekend—it
> can wait till Monday J
>
>
>
> Dale
>
>
>
> Dale Swensen
>
> Head of Technical Services & Digital Access
>
> Howard W. Hunter Law Library
>
> 260D JRCB
>
> Brigham Young University
>
> Provo, UT 84602
>
> 801-422-4407
>
> Fax 801-422-0404
>
> [log in to unmask]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
|