[DCRB-L] General principles: numbering

[Deborah J. Leslie]

I have been stimulated by the discussion so far on Joe's fine draft on general principles. I do have a few comments to make, intend to separate them in different messages. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Jain Fletcher [mailto:jfletchr at library.ucla.edu]
Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 2:49 PM
To: DCRB-L
Subject: [DCRB-L] Gen'l Principles: a few comments

	<...>  
	I am even more grateful that Larry spoke so assertively about the point in the GP draft trying to align rule numbering.  ["Follow the numbering of AACR2 wherever possible, especially in cases where AACR2 itself uses identical numbers to cover comparable concepts in different chapters."] Although it is an honorable goal, I find I also "flat out disagree" with this idea for practical reasons.  First of all, even in DCRB, extra numbered parts and sections were often needed to address issues specific to rare books.  We will probably continue to need this flexibility and should not paint ourselves into a corner by trying to align with a set of rules that does not completely address our material.  Which leads to the other point: we are now aligning more than one format.  Speaking for music alone, that format also needs some flexibility to incorporate specific rules that do not relate to books.  (In AACR2, as a single-volume work, it was easy to align from chapter to chapter, but now, with these being intended as stand-alone [whether electronic or print], we will have to act accordingly.)

_____________

I am not sure what Joe has in mind, but discussion and agreement before now on numbering consistency between DCRM(B) and AACR2 amounted to harmonizing the broad numbering within sections. This is of particular interest to Jane Gillis & Juliet McLaren writing the rare serials rules, as I remember. 

If it really is such a moving target as John Attig suggests, an alternative is to completely discard the current numeric/alphabetical numbering scheme of AACR, and apply a different scheme altogether, say, a legal-style numbering. ISBD(A) does this. Single consecutive numbers denote areas (2=edition area), one decimal point refers to the element (2.3=statements of responsibility relating to the edition), with subsequent rules numbered by added decimal points, down to the paragraph level. In fact, one of my goals was to number the paragraphs within the rules in the revision. (Anyone trying to refer to any part of DCRB 4.D2 will know precisely why this is important). 

Perhaps we can consist with the area and element numbering of AACR2 & ISBD (assuming they agree with each other, which I haven't checked), and sub-number our rules and paragraphs as needed. And if so, the General Principles can either be modified, or it can be understood that that is how we mean what is said there. 

________________________
Deborah J. Leslie
Head of Cataloging
Folger Shakespeare Library
201 East Capitol St., S.E.
Washington, D.C. 20003
202.675-0369 (voice)
202.675-0328 (fax)
djleslie at folger.edu