[DCRM-L] DCRB Core

[Manon Theroux]

DCRB Core is presented on the BIBCO page as a supplement to the core 
standard for Books:
http://www.loc.gov/catdir/pcc/bibco/core2002.html

So, I suspect the MA for 502 and 505 is present in DCRB Core simply 
because it is present in the Books Core (the Books Core standard came first).

Jain and Bob and others involved with establishing the DCRB Core 
might be able to comment further.

-Manon

P.S. I am on the PCC Standing Committee on Standards and I've given 
that group a heads up that some revisions will be needed to the DCRB 
Core after DCRM(B) is published (e.g. 510 citations will no longer be 
required).

At 11:22 AM 3/1/2006, Windy Lundy wrote:
>Deborah,
>
>Thank you for noting and recommending my article.
>
>For the past few days, I've been thinking about your question 
>concerning promotion of the DCRB Core standard.  I'm not sure how 
>more can be done than has already been done with the work of the 
>Task Force that wrote the standard, approval by the PCC, and the 
>inclusion of the standard in the appendix in DCRM(B).  The 
>appendices of DCRM(B) are important and including the core-level 
>definition in Appendix C will give it additional prominence and 
>perhaps greater visibility to rare book catalogers than the PCC 
>website.  The Books Core standard has had much acceptance, but in at 
>least some cases the decision to apply the Books Core as the default 
>standard is an administrative one.  I think application of the DCRB 
>Core standard really is a matter of cataloger's judgment.  If an 
>administrative decision were made to use a less-than-full-level 
>standard for cataloging rare books, minimal level is no longer the 
>only option.  Even though I did not expect that a huge number of 
>DCRB Core records would be identified in the utilities, I had hoped, 
>for the sake of the analysis, that there would be more records than 
>there were.  Mostly, as I indicated, reasons for catalogers' use of 
>the standard were not clear to me.
>
>I'm still thinking on your query about the 502 and 505.  Perhaps 
>others have comments about them.
>
>Windy
>
>
>****************
>M. Winslow Lundy
>Assistant Professor
>Catalog Librarian
>University of Colorado at Boulder Libraries
>184 UCB
>Boulder, CO 80309
>phone: 303-492-3918
>fax: 303-492-0494
>email: windy.lundy at colorado.edu
>
>
>
>----------
>From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] 
>On Behalf Of Deborah J. Leslie
>Sent: Monday, February 27, 2006 1:29 PM
>To: dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu
>Subject: [DCRM-L] DCRB Core
>
>I have just finished reading Windy Lundy's excellent, thorough 
>analysis of the use of DCRB Core in the bibliographic utilities. I 
>highly recommend it: Library Resources & Technical Services, v.50:1 
>(2006:Jan ), p. 42-57
>
>DCRM(B) has taken over Appendix C on core records from DCRB; I don't 
>think it's been changed very much. Windy's article got me thinking 
>about a couple of things.
>
>I wonder if the 502 dissertation note and the 505 formatted contents 
>should be "Mandatory if applicable"?  They are right now, but their 
>relative importance eludes me.
>
>It sounded like many of the bibliographic records in Windy's study 
>coded "core" actually met standards for full level. Perhaps Windy or 
>those who use DCRB core can comment on this. Is there something 
>DCRM(B) can or should do, or the Bib Standards Committee can or 
>should do, to promote use of the core standard and/or make it more 
>viable? Or have we fulfilled our duty by making it available for 
>those few institutions who want to use it?
>
>________________________________
>Deborah J. Leslie, M.A., M.L.S.
>Head of Cataloging
>Folger Shakespeare Library
>201 East Capitol St., SE
>Washington, DC 20003
>202.675-0369
><mailto:djleslie at folger.edu>djleslie at folger.edu
>
>