0E (DCRB-AACR2 analysis)

[Patrick Russell]

Hi all:

Again, are we talking about "MARC realities" or display.   For instance,
some of the specifics about ISBN punctuation have to do with display.  In
MARC  "--"  separating areas are not input; but that does not mean that
they should/should not be provided in cataloging rules per ISBD, since a
"display" could, at least with present MARC tagging structure, provide them.

I would bring the language back into line with AACCR2, restoring missing
parts.

This leads to another point that will continue to recur: I am generally in
favor of restoring "missing parts," rather than compelling one to "turn up"
AACR2 to find these as appropriate.  Of course, if a part is deliberately
missing because handled differently/elsewhere in DCRB, that is another matter.

Yes, replace [9] and omit rule found in [12]

Patrick


At 03:12 PM 6/3/99 -0600, Robert Maxwell wrote:
>
>http://www.lib.byu.edu/~catalog/people/rlm/bsc/dcrb/0E.htm
>
>Recommendations (bracketed numbers refer to locations in the 0E analysis):
>
>Either revamp the whole rule to make it reflect MARC realities or bring its
>language back into line with AACR2, restoring the parts missing from DCRB.
>Retain the changed examples.
>
>Retain the double punctuation option contained in [6].
>
>Replace [9] with : "Omit statements found in a prescribed source that do
>not constitute a part of any area, unless grammatically connected to
>information that should be transcribed. Do not use the mark of omission."
>
>Omit the rule found in [12].
>
>Retain the provisions for treatment of virgule [14].
>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>Robert L. Maxwell
>Special Collections and Ancient Languages Cataloger
>6428 Harold B. Lee Library
>Brigham Young University
>Provo, UT 84602
>(801) 378-5568
>robert_maxwell at byu.edu
>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>
>