[DCRB-L] Re: area 4 - dcrm(s)

[Jane Gillis]

Many thanks for the comments. --Jane

At 03:44 PM 5/6/2002 -0400, Ann Copeland wrote:
>Having trouble posting to the list. Here are my comments.
>
>
>A couple of questions about section 4. Thanks, Annie
>
>1)
>4B5. Fictitious...
>is followed by 260 $a
>It looks like there is an example missing?

This is very rare with serials and we just have not come up with an 
example.  We might end up using either a made up example or the DCRB one.


>2)
>4C5
>Rules says when omitting numerous places, "use the mark of omission and 
>add after it in square brackets a phrase...:"
>Example provided:
>260 $a Dublin [and 6 provincial towns]
>needs marks of omission.

I have put in the marks of omission.


>3)
>4D2 states that when omitting "insignificant information" , indicate with 
>marks of omission. None of the examples have marks.
>Also, do you see any contradiction with 4B3 where the rule states to omit 
>elements "not connected to the imprint by grammar.." without using marks 
>of omission? Information not connected to the imprint could be the same as 
>"insignificant information", could it not?
>In 4C2 of DCRB, p. 31, the two (insignificant information and addresses 
>and qualifications) are treated in the same rule saying all omissions 
>should be indicated with marks.

Juliet and I will have to talk about this one.  Do any of you have feelings 
one way or another on this?


>4)
>4D8 - close bracket? (example is taken from CCM, where there is no closed 
>brackets, but I don't really understand why. We close [s.n.]):
>260 $a[Dublin, Ireland :$bPrinted by Walter Cox,

We do no use the closing bracket when the field is incomplete.  The only 
time I could see using a bracket after "s.n." is when we do have the first 
year of publication and it is not bracketed:  [S.l. 
:$bs.n.],$c1750-  .  This also follows the DCRB and DCRM(S) rule that 
states that when adjacent elements are in one area, enclose them in one set 
of brackets, but when they are in different areas, enclose each element in 
a separate set of brackets.  By not having a bracket at the end of "s.n.", 
we don't have to remove them when we complete the record and have dates in 
the 260 that are bracketed (:$bs.n.,$c1750-1751].)

I think the CONSER rule does make sense and it really doesn't conflict with 
a DCRB rule.  For DCRB, we are dealing with one volume usually.  The date 
is either on the title page or not.  We would never just leave the 260 
field blank after $b.


Jane Gillis | Rare Book Cataloger|  Sterling Memorial Library
Yale University | New Haven CT  06520
(203)432-8383 (voice) | (203)432-7231 (fax) | jane.gillis@ yale.edu