Topic 4. Transcription

[Stephen Tabor]

At 06:07 PM 1/20/99 -0700, Bob Maxwell wrote:
>Especially for titles that are used frequently (either containing common
>terms or for works that have been issued in many editions), both dcrb
>transcribed titles and exact transcriptions give an entirely arbitrary sort
>order in title searches. 

If sorting is the concern, is there not an option to add a non-printing 240?

Every rule we make that permits tampering with the form of the title in the
source (and with this I would include the splitting of digraphs mandated in
LCRI) compromises the catalogue as an identification tool. If you can't
compare a copy in hand with someone else's catalogue record and be pretty
confident of whether you have the same edition (i.e. typesetting) or not,
the cataloguing has failed in a fundamental way. Everyone who has spent
time in various institutions' catalogues is familiar with the critical
function that kicks in when one realizes that the cataloguer has massaged
the data somehow. One is less able to trust the record, and more inclined
to call the physical item up just to verify something that should have been
plain from the record. I believe it is possible to accommodate the finding
function of the catalogue (as distinct from the identification function)
within a policy of relatively literal transcription, by the reasonable use
of 240s and 246s.


Stephen Tabor
Catalogue/Reference Librarian

Clark Library, UCLA              2520 Cimarron, Los Angeles, CA 90018
(323) 731-8529            (323) 731-8617 (fax)              stabor at ucla.edu
    http://www2.humnet.ucla.edu/humnet/clarklib/