Les Hawkins and John Mitchell have gone back into the document to change the font size and improve the general readability of the pages.
Speed in making the comments available to the membership was our original concern. Unfortunately, we do not have certified staff dedicated specifically to reformatting, linking, and otherwise translating documents to an electronic format, nor can we easily re-assign our program specialists from their other PCC duties to such activities in spite of their willingness and adeptness at self-training.
Anthony R.D. Franks
Team Leader, Cooperative Cataloging Team
Library of Congress
>>> [log in to unmask] 03/30/06 12:46 PM >>>
Format of this document posting illustrates some kind of paradox,
considering what we're talking about here.
One would think that for this kind of communication, there would be some
way other than to be bound to a page-replica format. Is there no way to
post these things in a format that would come up in readable size, and
single stream text, so that one doesn't have to first raise the text to
a readable size, and then skip from page to page by cursor, in order to
read the whole thing? Or do one's own time-consuming conversions? These
are not the kind of document that one would want to use up paper to
The ProQuest Company
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [ mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Les Hawkins
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 10:28 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [PCCLIST] RDA - PCC standards committee comments
All, the comments from the PCC Standing Committee on Standards on RDA
available from: http://www.loc.gov/catdir/pcc/standards.html. Thanks to
Paul Weiss for compiling them and John Mitchell for posting them.