Print

Print


I would ask someone with an ability to understand this problem and
Korean to make necessary edits to this special rule if it and the
example is currently deficient or nonsensical. Put it into your copy of
the revised draft, rename the draft, and send it to me and I will copy
and paste the revised rule into my version. 

thanks, Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Robert Rendall
Sent: Monday, March 22, 2010 10:59 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCTG1] Non-Latin report latest draft

Suzuki, Keiko wrote:
> The 2nd and last thing is about Korean spacing issue in 3.2. Robert,
could you remind me what is the Mr. Morimoto's comment? We took this
part from CONCER App. O (See 5. on p. 3 of
http://www.loc.gov/acq/conser/pdf/ceg/AppendixO.2009-19.pdf) except I
added "not only descriptive fields and notes, but also headings," to
clarify it applies to headings after we consulted LC Korean experts
through David. If the addition affected something Mr. Morimoto
addressed, then we could surely change the part. But otherwise ...
>   

Keiko, all -

I've attached his original comment.

In his second example, spaces have not been put between the
Korean-script Korean words because the cataloger apparently figured that
this 245 field is not covered by the guideline because it does not
consist "solely" of Korean - it also contains a Japanese parallel title.
Which is sort of ridiculous, but I guess that is what you get if you
take the guideline literally.

Robert.