Print

Print


Not "recall" but understanding what you have recalled.  Punctuation helps
in that regard.

Gene Fieg

On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 11:21 AM Luiza Wainer <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> I don’t understand how removing punctuation would affect recall.
>
>
>
> *From:* Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:
> [log in to unmask]] *On Behalf Of *Gene Fieg
> *Sent:* Thursday, December 13, 2018 2:14 PM
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* Re: [PCCLIST] New policy regarding limited use of ISBD
> punctuation in bibliographic records
>
>
>
> I think we should remember that ISBD and cataloging manuals based on it
> thought of the bibliographical records in sentence form.  Getting rid of
> punctuation will remove that factor; and might and probably will make the
> patron work harder to search the catalog and find what he/she wants; and
> when he finds it, more difficult to understand if that is the item that he
> was looking for.  Recall the goals of FRBR.  Does this new direction
> violate the basic goals of FRBR?
>
>
>
> Gene Fieg
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 12:17 PM Xiaoli Li <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> PCC colleagues,
>
>
>
> At its recent meeting
> <https://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/documents/PoCo-2018/PoCo-Agenda-2018.pdf>,
> the PCC Policy Committee reaffirmed its decision to allow bibliographic
> records with limited ISBD punctuation to be treated as full-level PCC copy.
> This decision comes after reviewing feedback from test participants who
> evaluated three test sets of records provided by Library of Congress, the
> National Library of Medicine, and OCLC. For more information about the
> test, please read the message below or click here
> <http://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/documents/test-records-punctuation.html>.
>
>
>
> Beginning in spring 2019, PCC libraries will have three options to handle
> ISBD punctuation when authenticating new records:
>
>    1. Continue current practice
>    2. Omit terminal period in any field*; code Leader/18 (Descriptive
>    cataloging form) “i”
>    3. Omit ISBD punctuation between subfields of descriptive fields and
>    omit terminal period in any field*; code Leader/18 (Descriptive cataloging
>    form) “c”
>
> * Exception: Terminal periods integral to the data (e.g., recorded as part
> of abbreviations, initials, etc.) should not be omitted.
>
>
>
> Options 2 and 3 are optional, not mandatory. However, creating records
> with limited punctuation is expected to save time for catalogers, simplify
> training of new catalogers, make it easier to map data to and from other
> formats, and allow for an easier transition to linked data or vice versa
> (e.g., mapping BIBFRAME to MARC).
>
>
>
> To facilitate the implementation, PCC will:
>
>    1. Develop and maintain style guidelines for records with limited
>    punctuation;
>    2. Provide adequate training resources for catalogers and revise PCC
>    documentation to update policies and include examples with limited
>    punctuation;
>    3. Request that LC Network Development and MARC Standards Office and
>    bibliographic utilities revise MARC 21 documentation to include examples
>    with limited punctuation;
>    4. Work with bibliographic utilities and other interested parties to
>    develop tools and specifications to automate the process of removal or
>    reinsertion of punctuation;
>    5. Encourage vendors, bibliographic utilities, etc., to explore
>    functionality to index and display records with limited punctuation as
>    defined by the PCC;
>    6. Encourage vendors, bibliographic utilities, etc., to explore
>    functionality to allow their users to easily add or remove punctuation as
>    needed.
>
> The Policy Committee is in the process of developing a detailed
> implementation plan which will include the aforementioned style guidelines.
> I will share more information with you as it becomes available. In the
> meantime, if you have questions, suggestions, or comments, please feel free
> to contact me.
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
>
> Xiaoli Li
>
> PCC Chair
>
> Head of Content Support Services
>
> UC Davis Library
>
> (530) 752-6735
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]> on
> behalf of Lori Robare <[log in to unmask]>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 6, 2018 3:08 PM
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* [PCCLIST] Testing use of limited ISBD punctuation in
> bibliographic records
>
>
>
> Hi all,
>
>
>
> Last spring it was announced that the PCC was moving forward to implement
> the recommendations of the PCC ISBD and MARC Task Group (Revised Final
> Report 2016 <https://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/documents/isbdmarc2016.pdf>).
> The timeline called for a period of testing and outreach, but there were
> some delays in getting that started. Now we are ready!
>
>
>
> Please see the attached announcement for details. The announcement is also
> available on the PCC website
> <http://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/documents/test-records-punctuation.html>.
>
>
>
> I would like to emphasize that the purpose of this test is to gather
> feedback about how bibliographic records with limited ISBD punctuation
> function in library systems and other applications, and to enable the PCC
> to make decisions about the feasibility of a policy change. This
> announcement will be shared widely so that libraries, vendors, and others
> who make use of MARC data are aware of the test.
>
>
>
> The test will run through July 1, 2018. The announcement includes links to
> a website with sets of test records and to a survey for providing feedback.
>
>
>
> Lori Robare
>
> PCC Chair
>
> University of Oregon Libraries
>
> [log in to unmask]
>
>
>
>
>
>