Print

Print


Yes, good and sober. 

Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Robert Rendall
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2010 6:50 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCTG1] Non Latin document final check

Sober PCC-guidelines-style prose:

Copying the non-Latin heading into a 4XX field in the authority record 
will usually be an efficient process and will extend its benefit beyond 
a single bibliographic record.

R.

D. Brooking wrote:
> 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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>