<div dir="ltr">John: ...All the more evidence that BSC needs to take an active role in schema development. :-) <div><br></div><div>Francis: How about a class for numbering? With properties (elements): pagination, foliation, plate numbering schemes, signature statements, collation, etc.? </div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Allison</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 1:29 PM, JOHN LANCASTER <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jjlancaster@me.com" target="_blank">jjlancaster@me.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word">But curiously the description in the Bibframe vocabulary is actually of registers, often not present in a book with signatures: ‘<span style="color:rgb(102,102,102);font-family:'Open Sans','Helvetica Neue',Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif;line-height:20px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">Lists or summaries of signatures often printed at the end of early printed books.</span>” And it “refines” note (i.e. “<span style="color:rgb(102,102,102);font-family:'Open Sans','Helvetica Neue',Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif;line-height:20px;background-color:rgb(245,245,245)">Additional descriptive information associated with the resource.</span>”), so I don’t think it’s either accurate or quite relevant.<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><div><br></div><div>John Lancaster</div></font></span><div><div class="h5"><div><br></div><div><br><div><div>On Jun 12, 2015, at 1:13 PM, Lapka, Francis <<a href="mailto:francis.lapka@yale.edu" target="_blank">francis.lapka@yale.edu</a>> wrote:</div><br><blockquote type="cite">
<div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia",serif;color:#1f497d">Thanks Allison.<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia",serif;color:#1f497d"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia",serif;color:#1f497d">You make a good point: the character of pagination and foliation information is not that different from signature information. It seems to me there’s a case for keeping
them as separate data elements, especially if we want our displays to treat one differently from the other.
<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia",serif;color:#1f497d"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia",serif;color:#1f497d">RDA treats signatures in the instructions for Note on Extent of Manifestation (see 3.21.2.9). As part of our DCRM revision, I suggest that we’ll want to propose a
distinct data element for signatures. FWIW, there’s a property for <i>signature</i> in the provisional Bibframe Lite + Library + Rare Materials vocabulary:<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia",serif;color:#1f497d"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia",serif;color:#1f497d"><a href="http://bibfra.me/view/rare/" target="_blank">http://bibfra.me/view/rare/</a><u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia",serif;color:#1f497d"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia",serif;color:#1f497d">Francis<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia",serif;color:#1f497d"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia",serif;color:#1f497d"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia",serif;color:#1f497d"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia",serif;color:#1f497d"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia",serif;color:#1f497d"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> <a href="mailto:dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu" target="_blank">dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu</a> [<a href="mailto:dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu" target="_blank">mailto:dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Allison Jai O'Dell<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, June 11, 2015 5:08 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> DCRM Users' Group<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [DCRM-L] revision of extent, dimensions, etc. (ALA proposal)<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<div><p class="MsoNormal">I agree that the rare materials use case for a pagination statement such as "[12], 72, [10], 48, [6], 228, [16] pages" has do with
<i>numbering</i>, not extent. Such statements help document what's in a book (leaves, printing, etc.) They don't measure anything. <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div><p class="MsoNormal">I would suggest a numbering element, to include pagination, foliation,
<i>and</i> signature/collation statements.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div><p class="MsoNormal">I do like the aspect-unit-quantity model for true measurements. <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div><p class="MsoNormal">Allison<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div><p class="MsoNormal">On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 4:29 PM, Lapka, Francis <<a href="mailto:francis.lapka@yale.edu" target="_blank">francis.lapka@yale.edu</a>> wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #cccccc 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif;color:#1f497d">Thanks Deborah.</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif;color:#1f497d"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif;color:#1f497d">I assume that you are advocating for the infinitely more sensible: [12], 72, [10], 48, [6], 228, [16] pages</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif;color:#1f497d"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif;color:#1f497d">If RDA adopts the idea of a separate element for pagination and foliation, I wonder if there’s now a stronger argument for
reverting to the traditional form for such statements. That is, if pagination is a sort of transcription (now divorced from extent), and if the identification of unnumbered pages is a form of supplied information within a transcription,
<i>then</i> RDA (per 2.2.4) tells us that the use of square brackets is a valid way to indicate that the information is supplied. So the traditional format for recording pagination would actually be more in tune with RDA principles (for transcription) than
the “unnumbered pages” nonsense.</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif;color:#1f497d"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif;color:#1f497d">I’d be happy to raise this idea when we present the proposal to CC:DA (what fun that discussion might be!); and/or Matthew
or I could post such an argument on the CC:DA blog, in advance of the meeting.</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif;color:#1f497d"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif;color:#1f497d"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif;color:#1f497d"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif;color:#1f497d"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif;color:#1f497d"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif;color:#1f497d"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif;color:#1f497d"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #e1e1e1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in"><p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b>
<a href="mailto:dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu" target="_blank">dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu</a> [mailto:<a href="mailto:dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu" target="_blank">dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Deborah J. Leslie<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, June 11, 2015 3:24 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> DCRM Users' Group<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [DCRM-L] revision of extent, dimensions, etc. (ALA proposal)<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div><p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none">
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:ArialMT">I think the general proposal makes excellent sense. However, I am dismayed to see that the pagination and foliation element would still leave us with this ungainly statement:
</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none">
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:ArialMT"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none">
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:ArialMT">12 unnumbered pages, 72 pages, 10 unnumbered pages, 48</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none">
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:ArialMT">pages, 6 unnumbered pages, 228 pages, 16 unnumbered</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:ArialMT">pages</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif;color:#993366"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;color:#31849b">Deborah J. Leslie | Folger Shakespeare Library |
</span><a href="mailto:djleslie@folger.edu" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:9.0pt">djleslie@folger.edu</span></a><span style="font-size:9.0pt;color:#31849b"> |
</span><a href="tel:202.675-0369" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:9.0pt">202.675-0369</span></a><span style="font-size:9.0pt;color:#31849b"> | 201 East Capitol St., SE, Washington, DC 20003 | www.
</span><a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__folger.edu&d=AwMFaQ&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=t7GDkvcZa922K6iya7a6MxgVxxw7OjL0m1rPBXkflk4&m=3xggEZtdwQHCk0k-jASWlFV8bnxLY24Oh_-5G21ZxOA&s=LdyBhj0jDluRR_RjDxs5C1zoNHiawxQJGWRnphemqxk&e=" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:9.0pt">folger.edu</span></a><u></u><u></u></p>
</div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif;color:#993366"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #b5c4df 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in"><p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif">
</span><a href="mailto:dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif">dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu</span></a><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif"> [</span><a href="mailto:dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif">mailto:dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu</span></a><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif">]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Lapka, Francis<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, 10 June 2015 10:04<br>
<b>To:</b> </span><a href="mailto:dcrm-l@lib.byu.edu" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif">dcrm-l@lib.byu.edu</span></a><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif"><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [DCRM-L] revision of extent, dimensions, etc. (ALA proposal)</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div><p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif">Hi all.</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif">I call your attention to an RDA revision proposal that will be discussed in the CC:DA meeting at Annual:</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">
<span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif">Task Force on Machine-Actionable Data Elements in RDA Chapter 3 : Revision Proposal</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">
<a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__alcts.ala.org_ccdablog_-3Fp-3D2032&d=AwMFAg&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=t7GDkvcZa922K6iya7a6MxgVxxw7OjL0m1rPBXkflk4&m=AIMB40I0lcZrVq_HfybnwsKNYFjzXEqHWIEqujk9Jy0&s=B1LZA2oMP_sCOiM2VXJuP5xz7CiFf9ouiFBkXbFTPJU&e=" target="_blank"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif">http://alcts.ala.org/ccdablog/?p=2032</span></a><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">
<span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif">The proposal suggests major changes to RDA for Extent and Dimensions, as well as Duration. The primary aim is to allow numerical measurements
to be recorded in a machine-actionable fashion, applying controlled vocabularies for measurement types, units, etc. In so doing, RDA would incorporate changes already introduced in cataloging standards of the museum and archival communities. The potential
benefits are best outlined in the task force’s first discussion paper: </span><a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__alcts.ala.org_ccdablog_wp-2Dcontent_uploads_2012_06_tf-2Dmrdata3.pdf&d=AwMFAg&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=t7GDkvcZa922K6iya7a6MxgVxxw7OjL0m1rPBXkflk4&m=AIMB40I0lcZrVq_HfybnwsKNYFjzXEqHWIEqujk9Jy0&s=mUAA8fwJAa4VOKNgCjaiMyyJ4eR49OKUP4FaDa5Ds0M&e=" target="_blank"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif">http://alcts.ala.org/ccdablog/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/tf-mrdata3.pdf</span></a><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif">.</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif">Now let’s get to the fun stuff.</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif">In its review of Extent, the task force proposes greater adherence to the FRBR model by creating a new data element for Extent of the Content.
For some formats, it has long been standard practice to record a quantification of content as Extent, e.g. 3 maps, 1 drawing, or 2 scores. The proposal suggests that such information should now be recorded as an attribute of the Expression. For the DCRM community,
this change most impacts descriptions for Cartographic, Graphic, and Music resources. Extent of the
<i>carrier</i> for such material would now be recorded in terms of sheets, volumes, etc., as appropriate (for more, see page 134 of the proposal).</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif">The proposal also suggests a change that would impact all DCRM formats: a new element for Pagination and Foliation, which would re-purpose
many of the instructions in RDA 3.4.5 Extent of Text. We suggest this change because pagination and foliation data is fundamentally different than that recorded for other varieties of Extent of the Carrier. That is, only for subunits of volumes do we emphasize
how the resource <i>self-represents</i> its numeration. This practice is more like transcription than true measurement (for more, see pages 9-11 and 56 of the proposal).
</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif">I’m happy to explain (and/or reconsider) anything in the proposal that is unclear or troublesome.</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif">For those of you thinking “Egad!” or other oaths, rest assured that these changes are too major to be introduced quickly; and in places,
there’s still obvious work to do. You will have plenty of opportunity to shape how the proposal goes forward. Matthew Haugen (RBMS Liaison to CC:DA), Liz O’Keefe (ARLIS/NA Liaison to CC:DA, and contributor the proposal), and I are all keen to convey your sentiments.</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif">Francis</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Georgia",serif"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Corbel",sans-serif"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Corbel",sans-serif"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Corbel",sans-serif"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri Light",sans-serif">Francis Lapka · Catalog Librarian</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri Light",sans-serif">Department of Rare Books and Manuscripts</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri Light",sans-serif">Yale Center for British Art</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="tel:203.432.9672" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri Light",sans-serif">203.432.9672</span></a><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri Light",sans-serif">
· </span><a href="mailto:francis.lapka@yale.edu" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri Light",sans-serif">francis.lapka@yale.edu</span></a><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div></div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>