[DCRB-L] Fwd: AACR2 and MARC

[Jain Fletcher]

Yes, me too.  In fact, tho' I know many of the DCRM(Music) Task Group 
are already on DCRB-L, I forwarded Jane's message to our Group anyway.  
We had already decided to put our examples into MARC, but it's nice to 
see such an interesting angle towards support of the idea.
						--Jain

On Thu, 16 Jan 2003 14:46:45 -0500 "Deborah J. Leslie" 
<DJLeslie at folger.edu> wrote:

> I completely agree that examples in DCRM should be encoded in MARC. --DJL
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jane Gillis [mailto:jane.gillis at yale.edu] 
> Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2003 11:59 AM
> To: dcrb-l at lib.byu.edu
> Subject: [DCRB-L] Fwd: AACR2 and MARC
> 
> 
>  I am forwarding this message from Autocat because Gordon Pew makes 
an excellent point on why examples in AACR2 (and other codes, I would 
add) need to be in the MARC format.  I think this has been discussed in 
Bib Standards.  I hope we take this advice in formulating the DCRM 
chapters.
> 
> Jane
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Date:         Thu, 16 Jan 2003 10:37:06 -0600
> Sender: AUTOCAT <AUTOCAT at LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU>
> From: Gordon Pew <gpew at law.harvard.edu>
> Subject: AACR2 and MARC
> To: AUTOCAT at LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU
> 
> In replying to the thread about how to record a reprint date, Mac Elrod
> commented, "Some decade I hope we will have the examples in AACR2 given
> with MARC coding".  I couldn't agree more.  It has often been noted on
> this list that AACR2 is a cataloging code that is supposed to be
> communications-format neutral.  It is designed to serve catalogers who use
> every kind of carrier from typed-up cards to integrated library systems:
> and, as presently constituted, it is for use by libraries employing
> USMARC, UKMARC, CANMARC, Australian MARC (or their successors), and
> probably others.
> 
> Increasingly, however, national standards are moving toward harmonization,
> and non-Anglo-American schemes are being studied for harmonization as well
> (e.g., the German RAK, IIRC).  Increasingly, also, technology has allowed
> the automation of some of the smallest libraries.  These developments
> argue for the admission by the code-writers that the great majority of
> libraries interpret AACR2 through the MARC format.  There are some things
> in AACR2 that I find very cumbersome to place within the MARC format.
> One of the latest developments, the accommodation of earlier and current
> imprints for looseleafs and other integrating resources, is a case in
> point.  In AACR2, the provision of this information is made by notes: in
> the MARC format, the information is carried (or will be) in repeating 260
> fields.  In AACR2, 2002 revision, this is explained in 12.4 et seq., where
> one is instructed to use notes for earlier publishing information.  You
> must know the MARC format in order to know that you should enter earlier
> place and publisher in a second 260 field: and your automated system may
> or may not generate a note in the bibliographic record.  If it doesn't,
> you must add one manually.
> 
> If "they" won't take the steps necessary to make the correlation between
> AACR2 and the MARC format, perhaps it is time for someone else to create a
> work that will provide this vital service for catalogers -- especially in
> a time when professional catalogers seem, literally, to be a dying breed.
> (And don't even get me started on the complications caused by the LCRIs!)
> 
> Gordon Pew
> Head of Copy Cataloging and Database Management
> Harvard Law School Library
> 164 Langdell Hall
> 1545 Massachusetts Avenue
> Cambridge, Mass. 02138
> gpew at law.harvard.edu
> (617) 495-4487 
> 
> Jane Gillis | Rare Book Cataloger|  Sterling Memorial Library
> Yale University | New Haven CT  06520
> (203)432-8383 (voice) | (203)432-7231 (fax) | jane.gillis at yale.edu
> 
> 

Jain Fletcher 
Head, Technical Services Division
Dept. of Special Collections 
A1713 YRL
Research Library - UCLA
Box 951575
Los Angeles, CA   90095-1575

v: (310) 794-4096
f:  (310) 206-1864