Fwd: DCRM (S)

[Jane Gillis]

I am forwarding this message to the list. --Jane

>Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2002 16:30:21 -0500
>From: Ann Copeland <auc1 at psulias.psu.edu>
>Subject: DCRM (S)
>X-Sender: auc1 at psulias.psu.edu
>To: Jane Gillis <jane.gillis at yale.edu>, Juliet McLaren <juliet at citrus.ucr.edu>
>Cc: Deborah Leslie <DJLeslie at FOLGER.edu>, auc1 at psulias.psu.edu
>X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0
>
>Juliet and Jane,
>
>    I'm sorry to be so last minute with these comments. I'm not going to 
> bother the whole list since they are presumably on to Area 2 already! I'm 
> still somewhere around 1D1 yet, but I thought I would send these along now.
>
>0E:
>"Give all elements in the other areas (other than the key-title (see AACR2 
>1.8C)) and titles and quotations in notes)..."
>pls. remove one of the double parentheses following "1.8C"
>
>
>1.B1 Title proper
>
>Having said in the general rules 0C: "Do not transcribe the punctuation 
>marks ... or [ ] when present in the source; replace them by -- and ( ) 
>respectively."
>do we really need to repeat "If the title proper as given in the chief 
>source of information includes the punctuation marks 
 or [ ], replace 
>them by ­ and ( ), respectively." in 1.B1?
>
>Similarly, in 0E. Language and script: "Replace symbols or other matter 
>that cannot be reproduced...."
>then again in 1B1:
>"If the title proper as given in the chief source of information includes 
>symbols or other matter that cannot...."
>
>
>Chief source :
>
>Both the table in "0B1: Basis of description", and in "0J: Items with 
>several chief sources of information" are very
>clear that the first or earliest part in hand should be used as the chief 
>source. Then in 1B1 when discussing a case in which there is a typo in the 
>title proper the option is provided:
>"Optionally, if the title proper on a later issue has the corrected title, 
>base the description on that issue or part."
>This seems a bit contradictory to me.... and not quite kosher. While we 
>may do such a thing (!), do we really want to provide this as a valid 
>option? If yes, then maybe following that option we should insist that the 
>incorrect spelling on the first/earliest be specified as sort of the 
>reverse of 7B41 :
>
>"If the title proper on any issue has typographical error(s) make a note 
>on the corrected title.
>
>      245 04 $aThe post-man and the historical accunt [sic].
>      246 1  $iCorrected title:$aThe post-man and the historical account."
>
>But then one would be forced to provide something like  " 246 1 Earlier 
>incorrect title: ...  " which is suspicious, indeed!
>
>
>1B4  marks of ommission:
>"If the title includes a date, name, number, etc., that varies from issue 
>to issue, omit this date, name, number, etc., and replace it by the mark 
>of omission, unless it
>occurs at the beginning of the title, in which case do not give the mark 
>of omission. "
>
>Maybe we should say something closer to CONSER about dates at the end 
>where there is no grammatical link so no marks are required? We don't 
>really even leave this as an option:
>
>"likewise, if it occurs at the end, do not use the ellipsis, unless the 
>date or number omitted was grammatically linked to the rest of the 
>title.  A grammatical link is a word such as "for" or "in" that links the 
>title to a date, number, or a phrase that contains the date or number. " 
>(CCM 6.1.7)
>Maybe we should provide another example (totally hypothetical) to illustrate?:
>Title page: Report 1802
>245 10 Report.
>
>Have a great weekend! Annie Copeland (PSU)

------------------------------------------------------------
Jane M. Gillis
Rare Book Team, SML,
Yale University Library
P.O. Box 208240,   New Haven, CT  06520-8240
Telephone: 203-432-8383 ; Fax: 203-432-7231
Email: jane.gillis at yale.edu
-------------------------------------------------------------