Print

Print


Thanks, sorry, I didn't realize that David wanted that also as part of
the statement. Why not.

Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of D. Brooking
Sent: Monday, March 22, 2010 4:35 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCTG1] Non Latin document final check

I like the phrase after the dashes too, as a final selling point.

  a simple "cut and paste"
> will usually make this an efficient process and extend the benefit
> beyond a single bibliographic record."



************
Diana Brooking             (206) 685-0389
Cataloging Librarian       (206) 685-8782 fax
Suzzallo Library           [log in to unmask]
University of Washington
Box 352900
Seattle WA  98195-2900

On Mon, 22 Mar 2010, Fletcher, Peter wrote:

> I'll add the text as David wrote it here: When PCC catalogers do
supply
> parallel fields for headings in bibliographic records, they are
strongly
> encouraged to replicate this intellectual work as non-Latin variants
in
> authority records as part of NACO.
>
> Unless anyone is violently opposed.
>
> Peter
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
> Behalf Of David W Reser
> Sent: Monday, March 22, 2010 12:41 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [PCCTG1] Non Latin document final check
>
> Robert-- I don't think we could require it, but your added thoughts
may
> suggest a few additional words to be added to the effect of you came
> this far, why not go a little further, e.g., "When PCC catalogers do
> supply parallel fields for headings in bibliographic records, they are
> strongly encouraged to replicate this intellectual work as non-Latin
> variants in authority records as part of NACO-- a simple "cut and
paste"
> will usually make this an efficient process and extend the benefit
> beyond a single bibliographic record."
>
> OK?
> Dave
>
>>>> Robert Rendall <[log in to unmask]> 3/22/2010 3:25 PM >>>
> The set of changes I made in that document was meant to be limited to
> cosmetic and uncontroversial ones, so it definitely doesn't reflect
> everything we discussed last week!
>
> On your point 4, non-Latin references are not required in authority
> records, and neither are non-Latin headings in bib. records, but could
> we require a cataloger exercising the option to enter a non-Latin
> heading in a bib. record to also add it to the corresponding authority
> record?  Maybe not, but I'll just ask.
>
> Robert.
>
> David W Reser wrote:
>> Boy, I picked the wrong Friday to be off!  Just catching up with the
> many messages-- rather than try to respond to each, I'll respond to
> Robert's revision that was attached to this message and throw in a few
> additional things.
>>
>> First, I agree with all of Robert's changes.
>>
>> 1.  Second paragraph, last sentence refers to "MARC formats" but I
> think what was meant was MARC record types (formats at this point
would
> mean bibliographic, authority, holdings).
>>
>> 2.  Section 2, general guidelines:  Please change the link to the
> ALA-LC romanization tables to:
>>
>> http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.standards/docs.roman
>> (we assigned a persistent URL to publish in RDA and other places,
> particularly useful since it is not known how long the "cpso" domain
> will last).
>>
>> 3.  Section 2.3.1:  Example for   Xun yi cao de chun tian  [I think
> there was an earlier comment to delete the example, to which I would
> concur-- not really clear what is being illustrated here]
>>
>> 4.  Section 2.5, first paragraph, last sentence.  I would agree with
> strengthening the statement somewhat (It is *strongly* recommended
...),
> but since non-Latin variants are optional in NACO, you can't really
say
> "should" as some have suggested in other messages.
>>
>> Thanks for all the hard work!
>>
>> Dave
>>
>>
>>>>> Robert Rendall <[log in to unmask]> 3/22/2010 1:42 PM >>>
>>>>>
>> Attached is a copy of the original Word document (not reflecting any
>> more recent changes Peter has made) with tracked editing changes
>> (spaces, capitalization, punctuation, indenting "not" examples, some
>> wording) to the opening text, the Introduction, and sections 1, 2,
> 2.1,
>> 2.3, 2.3.1, 2.4, 2.5, 2.5.2.2, 3.2.3, and 3.3.1.
>>
>> Indenting the "not" examples doesn't seem to show up in tracked
> changes
>> but I think it sets them off better.
>>
>> Robert.
>>
>> Fletcher, Peter wrote:
>>
>>> All, also, please, when you send me (or to the list) a revised,
track
>
>>> changes of the document, name it with your name, for example,
>>> Non-LatinRobertMarch19, or something like that so I can keep track.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> thanks, Peter
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>