[DCRB-L] FW: Consistency TF: Area 2 analysis -- 2nd draft

[Jane Gillis]

AACR2 was the first set of rules that included special rules for rare book 
cataloging.  AACR did have simplified rules for incunabula (which were very 
much like the simplified rules for incunabula in the ALA Catalog rules, 
preliminary American second edition of  1941).  In fact, most if not all, 
rare book catalogers used the 1941 rules until BDRB appeared.  Neither the 
1949 rules nor AACR were considered adequate for rare book cataloging.  It 
seems that the JSC tried to make AACR2 a one-stop shopping place for all 
printed material cataloging, but it did not work.  When the draft rules 
appeared, no one was happy with the "Rules for Early Printed 
Monographs".  BDRB (and DCRB) could be considered LCRI's to these special 
rules.

If the JSC decided to delete  the Rules for Early Printed Monographs from 
AACR2, I would not be upset.  It appears the rules have not been "in sync" 
with either AACR2 or DCRB for awhile. There is a question as to whether or 
not anyone, anywhere, even uses these rules.  If anyone does, what have 
they been doing for the past 10 (or 20?) years.

 From Bob Maxwell's comment:

"Note that scrutiny is being given at this very moment to the Early Printed 
Monographs rules in AACR2; I therefore reiterate that the revision of DCRB 
does need to keep an eye on these as it goes about its work with one 
possible outcome of suggesting rule revisions to AACR."

Am I understanding this correctly:

The JSC updates AACR2.
DCRB, which is really an LCRI for the Early Printed Monographs rules, is 
revised and morphed into DCRM(B).
Any differences  between AACR2 and DCRM(B) requires that Bib Standards 
suggests rule revisions to AACR2 Rules for Early Printed Monographs.  What 
happens if the JSC does not agree with the revision suggested by Bib 
Standards?  Is DCRB/DCRM(B) an amplification of the Early Printed 
Monographs rules in AACR2 or are the rules in AACR2 a condensation of 
DCRB/DCRM(B)?

Jane

At 05:43 PM 11/15/2002 Friday-0500, Deborah J. Leslie wrote:
>Yes, we had talked about that, but let's not forget that as much as we
>would like DCRM to be embraced by the whole English-speaking world, our
>authority at this point still emanates from ALA. It would be
>presumptuous to delete the end of AACR2 chapter 2 and thereby force all
>the non-American libraries to use DCRM(B) for their rare books. --DJL
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Jane Gillis [mailto:jane.gillis at yale.edu]
>Sent: Friday, November 15, 2002 2:43 PM
>To: dcrb-l at lib.byu.edu
>Subject: Re: [DCRB-L] FW: Consistency TF: Area 2 analysis -- 2nd draft
>
>
>I thought I had seen a comment on the list that, perhaps,  the rules for
>
>Early Printed Monographs (2.12-1.18) should be deleted from AACR2 and
>that,
>instead, there should be a guide to DCRM(B).  At this point I can't find
>it.
>
>Would it be easier in the long run to delete the rules for Early Printed
>
>Monographs and instead in the various formats, give directions to the
>specific DCRM rules?
>
>Jane