Amy, I think the example used at the ALA presentation was the period after cm when a series was present. I think the range of what is considered “small stuff” ranges from James Weinheimer (small stuff=cataloging in general) -- to  (my pet peeves) ISBD/MARC dysfunctional punctuation paradoxes [e.g. that cm/series period], Appendix A capitalization rules in transcription, and death dates --  to, at the other extreme of fussiness, the NACO Participant’s Manual. While I doubt whether anyone is going to change JW’s perspective, I may still have enough flexibility left in my hardening arteries to re-tool if someone with clout would rewrite the Manual and state the principles of the new world order up front (e.g., consider Z1 to be the product of a large, bureaucratic organization that can be taken with a grain of salt). One thing I like about RDA is that it introduces a lot more flexibility in transcription; whether or not RDA/LCPS extends some of that flexibility into authorized forms for access points is still elusive to me, but it may be, as I suggested in my earlier posting, that this is more a matter of NACO policy & principles rather than the rules as such.

 

With regard to my particular small stuff question, keep in mind that for training purposes I still need to know if there is a rule even if I think it isn’t worth a drop of perspiration (e.g. the cm business), that I expect the question to come up since we encounter a lot of romance language series (and still make added entries unlike the institution that must not be named), and that personally I think in this case the use of capitalization in the access point reduces ambiguity.

 

(personal opinion/not my institution’s)

 

 

 

Steven, you recently quoted/paraphrased Barbara Tillich “don’t sweat the small stuff” and I think this question is definitely small stuff.

 

I wish that somebody with clout would say that the purpose of cataloging standards is to keep us all on the same page in general approach, but that “straining for consistency”1  in all details is counterproductive.   However, cataloging leaders seem to be busy on various committees occupied with various details.  Perhaps the best the rest of us can do is keep quiet and not give them more details to work on.

 

On the general issue of standards James Weinmeier recently wrote “if library rules become more like normal standards and focus on creating minimal levels of quality instead of defining everything that goes in and is left out of a record, I believe the tasks catalogers are facing and their solutions will become clearer.”2  The “podcast” (written) that this quote comes from includes an interesting comparison between bibliographic standards and other types of standards.  As we approach RDA, let’s think about what relationship our “standards” have to the “quality” of our product.  We believe that there is a direct connection, but the rules tend to take on a life of their own.

 

 

1 a LCRI that I think is no longer extant said not to “strain for consistency” on some matter or the other.

2 http://blog.jweinheimer.net/2011/04/cataloging-matters-podcast-no-9.html

 

 

I originally sent this query to LCHelp4RDA:

 

Is there an LCPS equivalent for LCRI Appendix A4.A1? From a transcription perspective, I would surmise that, per 1.7.1, the cataloger can follow the capitalization used in the resource in the series statement. But what about the authorized form for the series access?

 

LCRI A4.A1: “When the title begins with an introductory word used in apposition to the noun or noun phrase that follows it, capitalize both the introductory word and the word following.”

 

Per David Reser @ LCHelp4RDA,

I don't think there is an equivalent, other than the general instruction in A.10 to follow the Chicago Manual of Style when appropriate.  There are some examples in Chapter 6 that illustrate the practice.

 

I understand that CC:DA has a task group looking at Chicago Manual of Style in the context of RDA, perhaps if you'd like to pursue it you can contact John Attig as the ALA Rep to the JSC.

 

This seems more like a NACO policy decision insofar as it applies to capitalization in an authorized access point, but there are so many task groups floating around on the PCC/RDA page I’m not sure who to contact. Which task group would that be, assuming there is one? I’m sure other folks comparing LCRI & LCPS are running into similar questions.

 

thanks,

 

Steven Arakawa

Catalog Librarian for Training & Documentation

Catalog & Metadata Services, SML, Yale University

P.O. Box 208240 New Haven, CT 06520-8240 
(203)432-8286 [log in to unmask]