<html>
<body>
A few additional comments on Appendix B:<br><br>
B1.3. first line Congress' guidelines (make possessive)<br><br>
B1.4. We say these guidelines are not intended for traditional archives
and manuscripts and direct catalogers of those materials to DACS. Then in
B3 we discuss arrangement and description and finding aids, send
people to Roe's <i>Arranging and Describing Archives and Manuscripts</i>
for more guidance, and in B3.2 talk about the basic tenets of archival
practice. Does this seem contradictory to anyone? I suggest at B1.4
adding a sentence following the mention of DACS to the effect
of:<br><br>
However, many of the activities associated with arranging and describing
traditional archival or manuscript collections also pertain to
collections of printed materials and are referenced in these guidelines
(or something).<br><br>
B4. I find the first sentence awkward. Could we turn it around? "Use
AACR2 and the LCRIs....<br><br>
240 - typo, needs "to": according <b>to</b> AACR2<br><br>
300 field...Dimensions. <i>Optionally</i> (there is nothing given as an
instruction to which there should be an option)<br><br>
5XX redundancy in last two sentences: described below / presented
below.<br><br>
May need to ask original authors about the next three:<br><br>
580 Linking entry complexity note : it seems to me that we should have a
corresponding 773 for the Margaret Mead Collection in the example. At
least in OCLC 580/7XX fields go together. <br><br>
7XX fields: added entries<br>
Add a sentence: If a 580 Linking complexity note has been used to
describe the relationship of the collection being cataloged to a larger
collection, make an added entry <br>
for the larger collection using a 773. <br><br>
B5.1. .... 245 field: Indicate in subfield $n that the collection ...
Sentence is a bit problematic. We are not asking catalogers to indicate
through the $n that there <b>are</b> more records, rather to indicate
which record it is among others. I would suggest something that says to
use the $n (number of part/section) to indicate which part of the
collection the cataloging record addresses (among others in a sequence of
multiple records). <br><br>
Thanks, Annie<br><br>
At 03:14 PM 9/13/2006, James Stephenson wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">A couple of observations for
Appendix B:<br><br>
B2.1: add bullet point for first category<br><br>
500 field, general note: do not italicize the direction<br><br>
Jim Stephenson</blockquote></body>
</html>