[DCRM-L] imperfect copies

[Robert Maxwell]

I like the idea of using the term "complete" instead of "perfect,"
although perfect includes both completeness and arrangement as issued.
 

Robert L. Maxwell
Special Collections and Ancient Languages Catalog Librarian
Genre/Form Authorities Librarian
6728 Harold B. Lee Library
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
(801)422-5568 

 


________________________________

	From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu
[mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Wickenden Jane
	Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 11:35 AM
	To: DCRM Revision Group List
	Subject: RE: [DCRM-L] imperfect copies
	
	

	My immediate feeling is that there may not be a perfect copy:
but there might be a more complete one ...

	 

	Jane

	 

	Jane Wickenden 
	Historic Collections Librarian 
	INM 
	Alverstoke 
	023 9276 8238 

	-----Original Message-----
	From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu
[mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Deborah J. Leslie
	Sent: 05 April 2006 18:30
	To: DCRM Revision Group List
	Subject: RE: [DCRM-L] imperfect copies

	 

	One of my earlier rewrites reads almost exactly as does
Stephen's, but I was concerned about the introduction of the word
"perfect." We've had discussion on that before.  If we are going to use
"perfect," what's to prevent us from introducing it earlier, as in:

	 

	0B2. Imperfect copies. In general, base the description on the
copy in hand. If this copy is known to be imperfect, however, and
details of a perfect copy can be determined, base the description on the
perfect copy.  Use brackets only where required for description of the
perfect copy.

	 

	We do have "pefect copy" in the glossary. Can someone remind me
why we decided not to use it in 0B2? 

	 

	 

	-----Original Message-----
	From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu
[mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Stephen Skuce
	Sent: 05 April 2006 12:53
	To: DCRM Revision Group List; DCRM-l at lib.byu.edu
	Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] imperfect copies

	 

	I think breaking up the long second sentence helps.
	
	
	0B2. Imperfect copies. In general, base the description on the
copy in hand. If this copy is known to be imperfect, however, and
details of a copy without the imperfection(s) can be determined, base
the description on the copy without the imperfection(s).  Use brackets
only where required for description of the perfect copy.
	
	Stephen
	At 11:57 AM 4/5/2006 -0400, Deborah J. Leslie wrote:
	
	

	Dear colleagues,
	
	Im not sure the instructions for cataloging an imperfect item
when a description for a perfect item is available are clear. 
	
	0B2. Imperfect copies. In general, base the description on the
copy in hand. If this copy is known to be imperfect, however, and
details of a copy without the imperfection(s) can be determined, base
the description on the copy without the imperfection(s), bracketing only
as description of the perfect copy would require.
	
	Is this clear? Is there a better way of saying it?
	
	__________________________________________
	
	Deborah J. Leslie, M.A., M.L.S.
	
	Chair, RBMS Bibliographic Standards Committee
	
	http://www.folger.edu/bsc/index.html
	
	Head of Cataloging, Folger Shakespeare Library
	
	201 East Capitol St., S.E.
	
	Washington, D.C. 20003
	
	djleslie at folger.edu || 202.675-0369
	
	http://www.folger.edu

	| Stephen Skuce  |  Rare Books Cataloging Librarian     
	| MIT Libraries  |  Building 14E-210B  |  617.253.0654 |
skuce at mit.edu

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20060405/629775b5/attachment.htm