DCRM(S) pt. 4

[Robert L. Maxwell]

http://www.library.yale.edu/conser/documents/dcrs.html	

4A3. In the interest of being explicit, I suggest you add somewhere here 
"Do not transpose." For example, you might word the last sentence to say 
"... transcribe the imprint 'as is' (i.e., do not transpose) ..." or 
perhaps better " ... transcribe the imprint as it appears (i.e., do not 
transpose) ..." By the way, why is it O.K. to transpose in the numeric etc. 
area but not here? It has never been clear to me why we allow transposition 
in DCRB, e.g., in the transcription of the title/statement of 
responsibility but make a big deal of not allowing it here in the 
publication area.

At the end of the first paragraph it should be made clear that the 
bracketed place name should be given in the language of the cataloging 
agency (no?).

This is also the rule where it is made explicit that the cataloger is not 
to abbreviate in this area. The second sentence seems to be speaking of 
publisher names and addresses, however. Assuming you do mean to include 
place names (as the example to 4B6 shows), perhaps it could be reworded to 
say "Do not shorten, abbreviate, or omit place names, publisher names, or 
addresses except as allowed in the following rules."

In DCRB 4C2 the default is to omit the address (with the option of leaving 
it in). Why is its transcription required here (and in DCRM(S) 4C2)? It 
seems to me that you would want to omit it in a serial all the more than in 
a monograph, since over the life of a serial the address of the publisher 
could well change several times, making the transcription in the 260 
applicable only to some but not all of the issues. Why is DCRM(S) *more* 
intent on recording the address than DCRB?

An example (with the original wording of the piece) of treatment of 
addresses in modern rare serials would be useful. Also a definition of 
"modern."

4A4. An example would be helpful.

4B3. I think we have established that references to doing things in English 
would be replaced in DCRM with "in the language of the cataloging agency." 
And by the way, example no. 2, "Le Haye" *is* the (or at least one) modern 
form of the name, so it wouldn't need to have a bracketed explanation under 
the rule even as it now stands. You might instead reword the rule to say 
"If considered necessary for information, supply in square brackets a form 
of the place name in the language of the cataloging agency." That way you 
rely on the cataloger's judgment and don't have to make distinctions about 
whether the form of the name on the piece is "modern" or not.

4B5. I suggest you add to the end "if necessary for identification."

4B9. Add "in the language of the cataloging agency" after "probable place" 
(1st paragraph), "province, or country" (2nd paragraph)

4D3, second example, I believe the convention is three spaces after the 
information in angle brackets: <1644   >

4D4. The rule about phrases seems to produce extremely odd results. "London 
:|b[s.n.] Printed A.D.,|c1650" seems somewhat over the top, if I may say 
so. "A.D." at least is clearly part of the date, and the word "Printed" has 
nothing to do with the publisher's name, what traditionally would go in |b. 
In the second example, I would personally think "printed at the full of the 
moon" was, again, part of the DATE, not the publisher statement. Could you 
reconsider this? I don't see any particular rare materials reason why this 
very odd way of setting up the 260 field should be required in our rules.

Also, shouldn't these two examples have a dash after the year?

4D5. Why do you depart from DCRB in the matter of Roman numerals? In DCRB 
Roman numeral dates are by default transcribed as arabic and not bracketed. 
Optionally they Roman numeral may be retained. Why is it thought necessary 
in the serials rules to bracket? Is there some serials reason why this 
should be treated differently? Those who are used to reading AACR2 and DCRB 
records will not assume that "[1656]" stands for a Roman numeral, since in 
the records they are used to the number wouldn't be bracketed. Is there 
some reason why you just can't take all of DCRB 4D2 as it stands into the 
serials rules?
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Robert L. Maxwell
Special Collections and Ancient Languages Cataloger
6430 Harold B. Lee Library
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
(801) 378-5568
robert_maxwell at byu.edu
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=