<html>
<body>
<font size=3>An elegant solution, clearly and succinctly expressed--those
are my first and second impressions.<br><br>
Minor "however": In my own work I'm not sure that I'd use the
word "script" in the note. I suppose it's clear, but outside
Library Land, whose denizens are familiar with AACR usage, it's a
slightly fuzzy word.* I might prefer something like "signed in Greek
alphabet"--not as fluent, but unambiguous. I presume the rule is not
prescriptive with respect to that wording, as long as the facts are
clearly explained.<br><br>
*E.g. the OED definitions of "script" (noun 1), especially
</font>"2. a. Handwriting, the characters used in hand-writing (as
distinguished from print). Also attrib.<a name="50216885se2"></a>, as in
script hand<a name="50216885se3"></a>, letter", "b.
Typogr.<a name="50216885se4"></a> (In full script type.) A kind of type
devised to imitate the appearance of handwriting", and
"d.<a name="50216885se5"></a> A style of handwriting resembling
typography, both in the shape of the characters and in their not being
joined together. In full script-writing; cf. print-script s.v. PRINT n.
16a. (Freq. used in the teaching of young children.)" vs. what we
actually mean, "3. A kind of writing, a system of alphabetical or
other written characters".<br><br>
<br>
<font size=3>At 3/31/2005 12:42 PM, Manon Theroux
wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>The DCRM(B) editors have revised
(and significantly simplified) the instructions for nonroman signatures
contained in the delta draft. Here is what we are proposing for the
epsilon draft:<br><br>
<a href="http://www.library.yale.edu/~mtheroux/DCRM/NonromanSignatures.doc" eudora="autourl">http://www.library.yale.edu/~mtheroux/DCRM/NonromanSignatures.doc</a><br><br>
I've also copied the new instructions in the text of this message, below,
though I'm not sure if the formatting will be preserved.<br><br>
We welcome your comments! Please send them to the list.
</font></blockquote></body>
</html>