| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • Stop wasting time looking for files and revisions. Connect your Gmail, DriveDropbox, and Slack accounts and in less than 2 minutes, Dokkio will automatically organize all your file attachments. Learn more and claim your free account.

View
 

Comments: Area 1B

Page history last edited by Margaret Nichols 10 years, 5 months ago

ADD EXAMPLE OF A LETTER OR PETITIONS WITH MULTIPLE PEITIONERS (AEB HAS ONE FOR SISTERS PETITIONING ELIZABETH OR JAMES FOR THEIR BROTHERS TITLE)

 

LOOK AT RULES FOR LEGAL DOCUMENTS

 

1B1 -- Change the sentence, “Record in a note that the title is devised, if considered important (see 7BX).” to: “If considered important, record in a note that the title is devised (see 7BX).”  The sentence is clearer if the clauses are switched. - OK

 

1B1: should add some explanation about “ms types for which a formal title is appropriate or is customarily used,” to make clear that there are many exceptions, and judgment is needed. IGNORE

 

1B1

1)      F&p: insert comma after “e.g.”; also, don’t use both “e.g.” and “etc.” in a list. Pick one. Move period from after 1B1.1 to outside the parentheses.    

 

2)      “e.g” and “etc.”  GETTING RID OF ETC. E.G. IS PREFERRED.

 

1B1 footnote

Should this really be a footnote? Might be better as the first paragraph of 1B1; cf. 1B2.

Text of footnote: “A devised title, also known as a supplied title …”  MOVE TO GLOSSARY OR PERHAPS ADD TO THE FIRST SENTENCE?  MOVE TO GLOSSARY FOOTNOTE IS GOING TO GLOSSARY!!!!!!

 

1B1.1: Last sentence of first paragraph: Shouldn't the note saying the title is

devised be a required note? Why not erase all ambiguity? Why would it be

"important" sometimes but not others? THE REASON IT IS NOT REQUIRED IS THAT MOST OF THE TIME ITEMS WILL HAVE DEVISED TITLES, ALSO IN A FINDING AID THIS WOULD BE TOO MUCH INFORMATION. IT WOULD BE AN INSTITUTIONAL DECISION. IN THE CASE OF BOOKS IT WOULD BE LIKE HAVING A NOTE STATING TITLE FROM TITLE PAGE. REQUIRED TO CLARIFY? IS THERE LANGUAGE WE CAN LIFT FROM SOMEWHERE ELSE? MAYBE THIS NEEDS TO HAVE A FOOTNOTE: IF THE TITLE SOUNDS TOO MUCH LIKE A FORMAL TITLE. WILL ADD AN EXAMPLE WITH A NOTE AND COMMENT TO ILLUSTRATE THIS POINT.

 

START HERE ON TUESDAY

 

ALOT OF 1B1 COMMENTS HAVE PROBABLY BEEN FIXED BY REWORKING OF THE SECTION

 

1B1.1. I was struck by the open-endedness of these instructions – “devise a brief title in the language and script of the cataloging agency” makes it sound like every institution is on their own to come up with their own guidelines. “If considered important” is another phrase like this. I see how this openness is a benefit, allowing each institution to determine their own policies. However, from my own experience I can say that some institutions might be more comfortable with a little more guidance – when might these notes be considered important? How exactly should the titles be devised? When I’m asked to formulate local cataloging policy, I have found it very helpful to have guidelines to point to that back up my decisions, and there’s a little too much left completely open to allow me to do that with these guidelines. I don’t think we want to make them entirely prescriptive, though, so I’m not sure what would be a good middle ground. I also thought more examples would be helpful after the first paragraph in this section.

 

RECOMEND THAT IT INCLUDES THE GENRE OR FORM AND IF POSSIBLE SUBJECT OF WORK. ADD MORE EXAMPLES UNDER FIRST AND SECOND POINT. GENRE OR FORM NEEDS TO BE PART OF THE DEVISED TITLES FOR LITERARY WORKS. POEMS ARE THE EXCEPTION. WORDING FIXED AND EXAMPLES ADDED/SHIFTED AROUND.

 

FOR INTRODUCTION WE NEED TO STATE THAT IT IS IMPORTANT FOR US TO GIVE THE RESEARCHER AS MUCH INFORMATION AS POSSIBLE SO THAT THE RESEARCHER CAN FIND IT AND POSSIBLY TELL US MORE ABOUT THE ITEM.

 

1B1 DEVISED TITLES BEING REWORKED AND COMBINED.

 

1B1.1

  

Use a descriptive modifying term or phrase when the material has a very particular focus of interest, but avoid creating the appearance of a formal title whenever possible.

 

If catalogers of yore were empowered to create formal titles for the ease of citation, cannot today's catalogers serve the same function? With a note that the title is now being devised for the first time, perhaps?

 

1B1.1

Include reference to appropriate rule in Area 7 at end “(see 7BX)”

Include example after first “Optionally” paragraph. Same example as above, with creator name at beginning.

F&p: quotation marks in 2nd “Optionally” paragraph. 

 

1B1.1. Example uses both subject content and genre, but rule says to use "either" one or the other

 

 

1B1.1.1: do not use “song”; use something like “text for musical work”.  Eg “Nearer my God to thee” is a hymn, not a song.

 

 

1B1.1.1 -- It seems inconsistent and confusing that poems and songs differ from other materials.

 

 

1B1.1.1

Last sentence: “If desired, Make a note on the source of the title, if considered important.” Or, if this note should be mandatory, delete “if desired” and don’t add “if considered important”.

Example: Precede with “Optional note”; add “of text” to end?

 

1B1.2

F&p: last sentence: close up spaces around hyphen

“Place written …” e.g./etc. 

 

1B1.2 and elsewhere: The phrase "elements of a devised title" and variants

thereof appears repeatedly. The word "element" has a specific meaning in

cataloging (or at least in ISBD cataloging), so it might be best to replace

"elements" with "required COMPONENTS of a devised [or whatever] title."

 

1B1.2.1 -- Although I do not favor recording dates in Area 1, it seems that it might be useful to have them available as an option for distinguishing between items in the creation of unique devised titles (as in AACR2 4.1B2). This is especially true for common items such as letters, where you may have multiple items that are only distinguishable by date.

 

DATE IS COVERED IN 1D.

 

1B1.2.1: Change "The following are required elements OF a title" TO: "The

following are required elements for titles of letters, postcards, telegrams,

etc." Also in this rule: it is funny to see the introduction of abbreviations

(ALS, TLS) that are introduced just so that we can be told not to use them. I

suppose this represents a change from past ms. practice(?) but to a novice like

me, it seems a bit mysterious.  MOVING TO 1A

 

1B1.2.1

Perhaps a more generic rule title? Compare with 1B1.2.2 Legal documents. “Communication documents”?

Start rule with positive instruction, not negative. If we’re not supposed to use abbreviations, what should we be doing?

“Form of communication document …”?

DONE

What if recipient not known? (see 3rd example)

F&p: “Subject of material …”: comma after e.g.

Example: “Autograph letter signed …”: when I first saw this example, I marked “autograph” and “signed” as being redundant; later rules explain that, for manuscripts, those terms mean different things than for books. Maybe don’t use this example here; wait until the distinction is made clear. The remaining 3 examples are sufficient. 

 

 

1B1.2.2 -- I see that optional elements of a letter, postcard, telegram, etc. are strongly encouraged (1B1.2.1.). However, why are the optional elements of legal documents and petitions not strongly encouraged?

 

1B1.2.2. Are the optional elements of a title strongly encouraged here as they are in section 1B1.2.1.?

 

FIXED

 

1B1.2.2

Move the parenthetical text to the “Form of document” bullet; don’t need it in both places

Add example showing unknown parties?

 

1B1.2.3. Ditto 

 

Should the line beginning “Subject of material, if considered important” be indented under “The following are optional elements of a title”?

 

1B1.2.3

F&p: “Form of document”: comma after e.g.

“Major …” bullets: use comma followed by “if known” (cf. 1B1.2.1-2)

F&p: “Subject of material …”: comma after e.g. 

 

 

1B2: define terms for inexperienced catalogers: first element of the description, chief title, title page substitute WILL DO IN GLOSSARY

 

1B2: First sentence: Change "The rules below cover situations in which a

manuscript has a formal title ..." TO: "The rules below are applied when a

manuscript has a formal title [FULL STOP]" FIXED

In addition to my suggested change in wording, here again I think the

definitional/explanatory text may belong outside the rule itself. The phrase "a

formal title, that is, a title that appears prominently on or in the item

[etc.] ..." is screaming "Glossary" (or maybe "Introduction") at me. TIGHTED UP

 

 

1B2, third sentence: I don't think transcription is used with print materials to

"collocate manifestations or versions of a work" as stated in this sentence.

"The most lamentable tragedie of Romeo and Juliet" will not file near "Romeo

and Juliet" though both of those are transcribed titles from printed books.

I think of collocation as being achieved through uniform titles. THIS WORDING PROBABLY NEEDS TO BE TIGHTENED. AND HAS MOVED

 

 

1B2, second paragraph, second sentence: Change: "Most manuscripts lack the

packaging" TO (perhaps): "Most manuscripts lack the indicia" or "Most

manuscripts lack the fairly standardized presentation of information that's

associated with typical published items"

 

 

1B2

Start with definition of formal title? In general, the rules are not used to explain or define things, and you may want to just let the glossary handle the definition. You’ve got 2 very long paragraphs here that don’t have any rules in them. Maybe start with something like: "When a manuscript bears a formal title, that is, a title that appears prominently on or in the manuscript, or is assigned to the manuscript in reference sources, transcribe …”  MOVE THIS INFORMATION TO GLOSSARY, SOURCE OF INFORMATION, FOOTNOTE.  PUT DOWN TO ONE SENTENCE OTHER INFORMATION MOVED.

 

 

You can also use footnotes to explain situations. Cf. the footnotes in DCRM(B) and DCRM(S) discussing the roles of booksellers/printers/publishers and editors, etc. THANKS DONE

 

 

1B2.1.1. This section seemed a little unclear in its definitions, but it is also the same language used in DCRM(B), so maybe it’s a moot point. It might help to define chief title somewhere; the archivists I talked to were unfamiliar with this term. THIS NEEDS TO BE TAKEN CARE OF IN GLOSSARY.

 

 

 

 

 

1B2.1.2. If desired, make a note to indicate the original position on the title page or colophon of transposed elements. --> Move to 1B2.2?

MOVED TO 1B2.1.1

 

 

 

 

1B2.1.3. I wasn’t sure about the order here – would this note make more sense after 1B2.2.1.? Again, this does follow DCRM(B), though, so maybe it’s ok.

 SEEMS LIKE WE SHOULD MOVE TO ABOVE 1B2 FORMAL TITLE

 

 

1B2.2.1. I don’t know that the text here needs to be repeated from 1B2.1.1. DELETED

 

WE GOT TO ABOUT HERE ON TUESDAY AEB

 

1B2.2.1 Last two sentences, first paragraph: Perhaps reverse the order. As it

now reads, a direction to make a note "if desired" is followed by note that

does not sound optional. I think the required information should precede the

optional.

 

DONE

 

1B2.2.1

F&p: e.g./etc. WHAT DOES THIS REFER TO? CAN'T FIND THE SPOT

Delete 6th example “Geruasij Tilberiensis …”: already used in 1B2.1.1; not needed here DONE

 

 

1B2.2.2: for each example, explain why that choice was made.  For the “My crucible,” example,  why  not transcribe this? THIS DOESN'T SEEM NECESSARY TO ME (MN)

 

1B2.2.2

Last 2 sentences: “If devising a title …, if considered important. For additional notes to make concerning titles, (see 7X). DONE

Examples: Reformat like those found in DCRM(B) 1B3.4 and DCRM(S) 1B6.4 (and, yes, I realize you will need a different word than “Transcription” but I don’t know what that is yet) DONE

3rd example: Need square brackets around mark of omission to indicate illegibility.  DONE, BUT NEEDS DISCUSSION

 

 

1B2.2.3. I had to read the first sentence several times before I could find the verb. I think a comma after the word “colophon” would help:

 

 

“If transcribing a formal title page or colophon, omit, without using the mark of omission, information found on the title page that constitutes non-title information.” DONE

 

1B2.2.3: It may just be a built-in problem, since few manuscripts have title

pages with this sort of stuff, but this rule does seem to be appearing late in

the rules. And is there a manuscript reason the boldface title of the rule uses

wording different from DCRM(B)? CHANGED TO DCRM(B) WORDING; STILL NEED TO CONSIDER WHETHER TO MOVE THIS SECTION TO APPEAR EARLIER IN THE DOCUMENT

 

 

NOTE: The wording of several rules is different from DCRM(B), though the content

doesn't end up seeming very different to me. I don't know whether there is a

manuscript-based justification for this. I noticed this in 1B2.8.1, 1B2.8.2,

1B2.5.3 (TENTATIVELY DONE), 1B2.5.4 (TENTATIVELY DONE), 1B2.5.6 (DONE), 1B2.6.2.1 (and order of options within the rule) (DONE),

1C3, 1C9.

 

 

1B2.2.3

Allowed Omissions in title page transcritions. If When transcribing … FIRST PHRASE CHANGED, BUT IN A DIFFERENT WAY, TO FOLLOW PHRASING IN DCRM(B). SECOND PHRASE NOT CHANGED (EDITORIAL GUIDELINES SAY TO PREFER "IF" TO "WHEN" AT THE BEGINNING OF A SENTENCE)

 

 

1B2.2.4: instead of “make an added entry”: maybe something like “give access to an authoritative term” CHANGED TO "PROVIDE ADDITIONAL TITLE ACCESS"

 

1B2.2.4. I had some discussions with my colleagues here about the phrase “make an added entry.” The consensus was generally that either phrase (“make an added entry” or “treat as a variant title”) would be fine, so long as it was clearly defined. The rare book librarian and I (a cataloger) both felt that added entry made sense but that we would not be confused by the use of the word “variant” in this context (I have never associated the phrase “variant title” with bibliographical variants necessarily). We all thought “treat” was a better word than “trace”. And the archivists thought that “variant title” was a little more to the point, but that if the term “added entry” was defined, it was also a familiar phrase and people would adapt to it fine.

 

1B2.2.4. Suggested wording for "make an added entry" based on what we're doing for DCRM(G): "provide additional title access" THANKS! DONE

 

 

1B2.2.4-1B2.2.6

“make an added entry”: The making of added entries needs to be moved to Appendix F (cf. DCRM(B)/DCRM(S) Area 0); the rules here should be restricted to (in MARC terms) the 245 DONE

 

1B2.2.4

1st example: Normalize capitalization throughout; also this example doesn’t show abbreviations, it shows missing letters FIXED

2nd-3rd examples: Delete “Added entry” lines DONE

 

1B2.2.5

F&p: Two apostrophes I DON'T SEE A PROBLEM WITH THIS

Examples: Delete “Title on item:” and “Added entry” lines. DONE; FOLLOWED ANOTHER COMMENTER'S SUGGESTION TO DEAL WITH THIS WHOLE SITUATION IN APPENDIX F

 

 

1B2.2.6

2nd sentence: “Optionally, make an added entry for the alternative title MOVED ALL THIS TO APPENDIX F ON THE SUGGESTION OF ANOTHER REVIEWER

Examples: Delete “Added entry” lines DONE

 

1B2.2.7

Delete 2nd sentence (cf. DCRM(S) 1B5, which changed this wording from DCRM(B) 1B5): “Separate the parts of the title proper by periods.” DONE

Last sentence: Also cf. DCRM(S) 1B5: “Make a note to indicate the original position on the title page of any transposed elements.” This note is not optional in B or S; if you want it optional here:

“Optionally, Make a note … if the arrangement indicated requires transposition, if considered important. Examples: Cf. AACR2 for punctuation of supplementary titles. NOTED TO CHECK

 

 

1B2.2.8: Change "Abridgments in the title proper" TO: "Abridgments of the title

proper" DONE

 

1B2.2.8.1

Cf. DCRM(B) 1B6 and DCRM(S) 1B6.1: Any reason to change for manuscripts? NOT REALLY--FIXED

“if desired” and “Optionally”: Cf DCRM(B)/(S) DELETED 

Example: “A list of the principal …”: add mark of omission at end FIXED

Example: “Catalogue of the works …”: add mark of omission at end; apostrophe FIXED

 

1B2.2.8.1 Example transcribes "ye" meaning "the" but DCRM transcription calls for "[the]" in such cases, because the "y" represents the letter thorn. EXAMPLE DELETED HERE, USED ELSEWHERE INSTEAD. ARE WE GOING TO FOLLOW DCRM PRACTICE FOR HOW TO RECORD "YE"?

 

1B2.2.8.2

Abridgment of  Alternative title

Example: “A new ballad …”: What are the 2 dashes? Normalize? NOTED

 

1B.2.3: why do petitions get a separate section?  It seems very strange to single out one type of legal document. ADDING TO CORRESPONDENCE

 

1B2.3.1

Is making a note on the source of title here really “if considered important” (i.e., optional)? Seems like that should be a mandatory note to me. NOTED FOR DISCUSSION

 

 

1B2.3.2

Examples: If making a note is optional (“if considered important”), then the note texts need to be prefaced “Optional note:” DONE

 

1B2.4.1: for literary and music works, first look for an authoritative uniform title; do not [treat as?] first edition unless there is no other source.  For music, first eds are often not a good source for an authoritative title. I DON'T THINK THIS APPROACH IS APPROPRIATE TO MANUSCRIPTS, THE VAST MAJORITY OF WHICH ARE UNIQUE ITEMS, NEVER PUBLISHED (MN)

 

1B2.4.1

“If a formal title is not present (or legible) on the manuscript, but a title is readily available … treat it such a title as a formal title…”? FIXED

Examples: Notes are mandatory, so first 3 examples need notes; last example: semi-colon is not ISBD. THANKS, DONE

 

 

1B2.4.1: The word "housing" may need to be defined in the glossary. IT'S THERE

SAME RULE: final example: punctuation?  FIXED

 

1B2.4.2

F&p: apostrophes; e.g./etc. FIXED

First sentence is confusing; another place where a good glossary definition will be necessary. OK, REWORKED A BIT

 

 

1B2.4.2: This rule feels chatty. Too long?  First sentence: Change "In a few

instances, a particular manuscript is known by its own name as a physical

object, apart from the work whose text it contains (e.g. ..."  TO: "Certain

manuscripts, as physical objects, are known by specific names (e.g. ..."

Second sentence: Change "In this case, if no ..." TO: "In such cases, when no

..." DONE, MOSTLY; EDITORIAL GUIDELINES SAY TO PREFER "IF" TO "WHEN" AT THE BEGINNING OF THE SENTENCE, THOUGH

 

1B2.5

I’m not sure how yet, but I think the rule numbering can be tightened up a bit WE AGREE; TO BE ADDRESSED

 

1B2.5.2.1

First example: Move to elsewhere; 2nd example does the same thing DONE

 

1B2.5.4

“If this other title information …” [Cf. DCRM(B)/(S)] 

 

1B2.5.5. It is unclear to me what this means.

 

1B2.5.6

Example: “Title on item:” : is that really a Comment?; Example does not illustrate rule on other title information

 

 

1B2.6: [Cf. DCRM(B)/(S)] CHANGED, BUT SUBJECT TO DISCUSSION 

 

 

1B2.6.1.1

“If the a manuscript …” OK AS IS

 

1B2.6.1.2 -- Why do rules call for only one space between titles. In AACR2 1.1G3 two are required (though it is again only one in DCRM(B) 1F1.2). NOT SURE WHY DCRM(B) DIVERGES FROM AACR2 HERE, BUT WE HAVE NO REASON TO DIVERGE FROM DCRM(B). THE ISSUE DOESN'T SEEM WORTH FUSSING MUCH ABOUT, AT ANY RATE

 

1B2.6.2

2nd paragraph: Need example NOTED

 

 

1B2.6.2: This is complicated. In DCRM(B), this shows up early, in rule 0C2. That

may be much more than is needed for MSS, but I do wonder whether this rule

belongs right here, in this form. If the statements of responsibility are

presented differently (work A = "Jennifer Nelson"; work B = "by Jennifer

Nelson"), what do you do? In such an instance, what would it mean to "use a

single statement of responsibility preceded by all the titles"? GOOD QUESTION; NOTED

 

 

1B3. "Follow local practice and judgment in determining where to record this information." --> Aren’t the rules meant to move people away from local practice? I think you could be more aggressive about suggesting the best course.

 

 

 

 

1B3 -- While material type should be included in a devised title (1B1.2), it does not seem to belong in a formal title. When formal titles appear on the material, the focus should be on transcription as a means of identification. Additional details could be recorded elsewhere (Area 2 or Area 7), as they were in AACR2 4.2B and 4.7B1. 

 

ACTUALLY YOU WOULD WANT THIS TO BE PART OF A FORMAL TITLE AS WELL IN ORDER TO DIFFERENTIATE THESE ITEMS FROM THEIR PRINTED/BOOK VERSIONS. (FOR EXAMPLE SOMETHING WITH A FORMAL TITLE THAT MATCHES THE PRINTED BOOK WOULD BE CLUMPED TOGETHER IN WORLDCAT WITH THAT WHICH WOULD BE FRUSTRATING TO USERS)

 

 

 

 

 

1B3.1: clarify that material type information is not part of a transcribed title?

 

 

1B3.1: First sentence: I was surprised to see no preference stated (record in

title, or record in a note)

SAME RULE: 3rd sentence: should "Precede material type by a colon" actually say

"Precede material type by a space-colon-space"?

SAME RULE: Will glossary define "fair copy" and "galley proof"? 

 

 

1B3.1. The second point (relationship of manuscript to the creator) mentions whether the item is signed, which is discussed at some point earlier in the chapter, making me wonder if there is some redundancy here, or if there should be a reference to the earlier section (1B1.2.1.)?

 

1B3.1

“Record material type information either as part of the title or in a note (see 7XX).”

F&p: 1st bullet: delete period inside parentheses

All bullets: “e.g.,” better than “etc.”

 

 

 

1B3.1.1. At this point I have to admit I started to get a little lost. This is a good breakdown of the ways to indicate material type in the title, but with all the earlier instructions about devised titles, it started to get a little confusing since the earlier examples (i.e. in section 1B1.2.) had included material type information but not gone in-depth explaining that aspect. I don’t know if reorganization would help here, or more references between sections, since it seems like a lot of flipping back-and-forth is necessary.

 

1B3.1.1

“Consult the glossary …”? (see also 1B3.1.4)

 

 

1B3.1.2

F&p: “Epilogue…” example: delete space in “T.N.”

 

 

1B3.1.3

F&p: commas after “e.g.”

“For facsimile reproductions… refer to AACR2 or DCRM(B).”?

Examples: Are “translated from …” and “by William Henry …” statements of responsibility? If so, they are not formulated or punctuated properly.

Example: “Our town.. .”; semi-colon is not ISBD, use comma?

Example: The bridge of San Luis Rey …”

 

1B3.1.3. unclear what it applies to, because a photocopy *is* a facscimile reproduction. Should it be "Apply this rule to facsimile publications only if..." rather than "Apply this rule to facsimile reproductions only if..." 

 

1B3.1.3: First sentence: Change: "Record that the item is a handwritten or

typewritten copy using the word copy" TO: "If the item is a handwritten or

typewritten copy, convey this information by including the word "copy" as part

of the ... [?]"

Third sentence: Change: "Record that the item is a mechanical, photographic, or

digital reproduction of a manuscript (e.g. ... " TO: If the item is a

mechanical, photographic, or digital reproduction of a manuscript, convey this

information by including a descriptive term (e.g. photocopy, mimeograph,

microfilm, etc.) in the ... [?]"

 

 

1B3.1.3: Under "Manuscript with formal title:" 4th example: punctuation error?

(semicolon)

 

1B3.1.4

“Consult the glossary…”?

 

 

1B3.1.4 suggest change heading to "Fragmentary, incomplete, or unfinished manuscripts" so it's clear you can skip the rule if you have a complete manuscript

 

 

1B3.1.4.1

F&p: “Macbeth. Act 1, scene 5”? cf. AACR2

 

 

1B3.1.4.1. needs a Comment because example in body of text ("Acts I and II") isn't at the same level as example in the example section, i.e. is the Julia Marlowe example a fragment of Act I because only scene 5 appears, or is it a fragment of scene 5 from act I? The note for the second version of the example clarifies, but it's still confusing. Better yet, could "manuscript excerpt" be added to the "fragment, incomplete, unfinished" list? It's not a fragment of what Julia Marlowe wrote down, it's the whole thing. 

 

 

1B3.1.4.1: The rule doesn't read very clearly. I'm not sure how to word it

because I'm not clear on the meaning.

 

 

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.