[DCRM-L] DCRB Core

[Robert Maxwell]

On the core, I actually managed to find the original html document which
was the official DCRB Core document in the Internet Archive:
 
A draft version:
 
http://web.archive.org/web/19980209171947/http://www.lib.byu.edu/~catalo
g/people/rlm/bsc/core.htm
 
Final version:
 
http://web.archive.org/web/19980209171947/http://www.lib.byu.edu/~catalo
g/people/rlm/bsc/core.htm
 
Some time after we submitted this to PCC (and they accepted it),
somebody there took it and incorporated it all directly into the books
core--which resulted in a changed document. (We weren't notified that
they were doing this.)
 
I am quite surprised to see 505 as part of the core. I think this must
have been added after we were working on the core (the DCRB Core was set
up as a supplement to the Book core, and so just shows what differs from
the "regular" book core). 505 isn't required for full records, so why
should it be required for core? Does anyone else remember the original
core? I used to have a comparison of core and full taped to my wall but
I finally took it down a couple of years ago. I don't think 505 was in
it back in 1996 or 1997.
 
Bob
 
P.S.--I append below the final report of the Task Force.

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 


 


DCRB Core Task Group

Final Report

November 1998

 

Task Group Members:  Jain Fletcher (UCLA), Chair; Eric Holzenberg
(Grolier Club), Bob Maxwell (Brigham Young University), Jerry Wager
(Library of Congress); Bill Garrison, PCC Standards Committee liaison
(University of Colorado, Boulder)

 

Chronological report of Task Group activity:  

At a meeting of the ACRL, Rare Books and Manuscripts Section,
Bibliographic Standards Committee (BSC) at the 1996 ALA Annual, Jain
Fletcher proposed that the development of a core record standard for
rare books be considered by its members.  A more far-reaching hope, that
this venture could eventually lead to the standard=s approval by the
Program for Cooperative Cataloging (PCC), was also expressed.  The main
reasons for making this proposal were: 

1)   that a core standard could be a viable and more widely recognized
alternative to the minimal level standards found in Descriptive
Cataloging of Rare Books (DCRB), Appendix D;

2)   that a core level would be another option for institutions seeking
achievable cataloging solutions for large backlogs of older or rare
books;

3)   that core standard would create a national database of records that
could be used dependably by copy catalogers

BSC agreed that Jain should take the period between ALA meetings to
investigate the possibility and its ramifications, then report back to
the BSC for further direction.  At the same ALA meeting, various PCC
committee members heard of this impending investigation and were
sufficiently interested to begin discussion of a more formal charge.  In
the next few months, Willy Cromwell-Kessler, the Chair of the PCC
Standards Committee, worked closely with Jain and Eric Holzenberg (Chair
of the BSC) in drafting a charge and in putting together the members of
the task group.

By ALA Mid-Winter in January 1997, Jain Fletcher was able to report to
the BSC that a charge had been drafted by the Chair of the PCC Standards
Committee and that the Task Group had been formed, comprised mostly of
RBMS members.   

The Task Group spent the next few months trading ideas over e-mail, in
preparation for its first full-fledged meeting at the 1997 ALA Annual.
When it met, the Group hoped to identify potential obstacles to
agreement in order to begin work on their resolution.  




During their first meeting at the 1997 ALA Annual, the Group found
itself to be in basic agreement that the existing Books Core was mostly
sufficient for adoption.  As they saw it, the real work would be in
reconciling the primary difference between the two, which was that,
instead of following AACR2 rules, the Arare book core standard@ would
comply with DCRB rules.  The group identified a number of areas where
the difference in these rules might call for divergence between the
Books Core and the rare book core standard.  Of these, two were expected
to cause much discussion on the road to acceptance.  One of these was
the decision to attempt to put forth a more simple approach to the I/J
and U/V transcription rules found in DCRB, on the premise that this
could considerably shorten the cataloging time needed for rare material.
The other was the decision to try to put through a PCC standard in which
a call number was not mandatory.  Each member went home with assignments
to complete, with a view towards assembling a first draft of this
standard.  As to the Group=s commitment to disseminate viable drafts to
the rare book community for comment, Bob Maxwell volunteered, in his
capacity as incoming Chair of the BSC, to be the focal point for the
wider discussion on this issue.  In addition, he volunteered his Website
as a location for the draft and himself for taking responsibility for
updating its various manifestations.  The Task Group=s progress at this
meeting was reported at the BSC meeting the next day.  One issue the
Task Group had discussed, but not resolved, was the name of the proposed
standard.  Discussion at the BSC meeting on this topic lead the Group to
finalize its name as DCRB Core Standard.

The period between the 1997 ALA Annual and 1998 ALA Mid-Winter was
especially busy.  By mid-November 1997, the draft was in sufficiently
good form to put on the Website.  Its arrival was announced on ExLibris
and on Autocat and  welcomed comment from all interested parties.  The
issue of the I/J and U/V transcription did indeed engender much
discussion from the rare book community, most of which was in opposition
to the Task Group=s proposal for simplification.  The numerous reasons
given for disagreeing with the proposed transcription change were so
articulate and well-reasoned that the Task Group essentially dropped it
from further consideration (although the draft core did not reflect this
for a while longer).  Conversely, the concept of not requiring call
numbers caused none of the anticipated consternation and instead, was
greeted with widespread approval by the community.

At the next ALA (1998 Mid-Winter), an extra BSC-sponsored meeting was
convened.  This was intended to draw a larger audience than the usual
BSC meetings, being a hearing on two impending issues with an expected
impact beyond cataloging.  One of the issues was the new DCRB Core
Standard.  In preparation for this hearing, Jain Fletcher prepared a
small array of cataloging examples positing various conditions where
full or core cataloging might be applied.  In this demonstration of the
differences which the levels of cataloging obtained, the Group hoped to
elicit further discussion about remaining issues of concern to the
community.  The meeting was gratifyingly well-attended and there was
certainly some good discussion there, but not as much as expected.  This
could have been taken as a sign of decisive approval for the core, but
the Group did not want to presume such a thing.  Instead, in case the
lack of discussion was a result of the need for more time to study the
examples, the Group resolved to allow for more time by loading the
examples onto the Website soon after this meeting.

Logistics of loading the examples were more difficult than anticipated,
but this was finally accomplished about three months prior to the next
ALA.  By this time, the PCC Standards Committee had begun discussion of
the DCRB Core draft and conveyed some of its ideas for changes, mostly
for purposes of clarification and presentation.  After these changes
were made, the Committee gave its approval.

At the 1998 ALA Annual, the BSC was able to express some of the few
remaining concerns about the core draft.  Working closely with Bill
Garrison, the PCC liaison, the Task Group was able to address the BSC=s
concerns without compromising the PCC=s approval.  

 




Components of the DCRB Core Standard:

In an unprecedented decision by a PCC Core Task Group, the DCRB Core
Standard was designed as a companion piece--or supplement--to the Core
Bibliographic Record for Books (called here the ABooks Core@).  This was
not an immediately apparent option, but it became more evident as an
option as work on the standard progressed.   It evolved from the Group=s
early determination that the Books Core was viable as the basis of DCRB
Core, with the exception of the difference in rules to be followed.
Working from that premise, the Group identified relatively few areas of
divergence between the two core standards.  From there, it made sense to
give prominence to those differences by keeping the standards separate.
This decision has the practical outcome of forestalling a reexamination
of the DCRB Core Standard every time there is a change in the Books Core
standard.  It also has the long-term value of emphasizing the
compatibility between the two standards, with its essential requirement
that anyone who intends to apply the DCRB Core must also be wholly
cognizant of the Books Core.

The Introduction to the DCRB Core Standard serves to explain that the
two standards are intended to operate together.  It also gives the
extent of the material to be covered by DCRB Core.  In addition, it
briefly discusses where cataloger=s judgment comes into play in the
application of the various options provided in DCRB.  A list of these
optional areas has been compiled and is available for perusal
(http://www.lib.byu.edu/~catalog/people/rlm/bsc/coreopt.htm) as another
aspect of the information provided in the Introduction.  Another useful
adjunct to the standard is the Aexamples page@
(http://www.lib.byu.edu/~catalog/people/rlm/bsc/corexx.htm), the set of
full and core examples showing how the core standard might be applied in
various instances. 

 

Outstanding issues:

The most obvious outstanding issue is for the DCRB Core Standard to
receive official approval from the PCC Standards Committee.  Following
that, the DCRB Core Standard, along with its Introduction, will need to
be moved (from its current location at
http://www.lib.byu.edu/~catalog/people/rlm/bsc/core.htm) to the PCC
Website.

Once these two steps take place, the Task Group recommends that the PCC
Standards site provide links to the site where the Alist of optional
areas@ and the AExamples@ are located.  The latter two documents will be
continue to be maintained (into the foreseeable future) by Bob Maxwell.

Finally, the Task Group strongly recommends that a phrase be added to
the Books Core Standard for catalogers of books printed before 1800,
directing them to the Introduction of the DCRB Core for guidance on how
to proceed.

It should probably be noted here that the RBMS Bibliographic Standards
Committee has recently initiated a revision of the DCRB.  As that
revision reaches its conclusion, it is possible that another review of
the DCRB Core will be necessary.  It is furthermore worth noting that
the current expectation for the DCRB revision is that the DCRB Core will
be included in that publication, thus not only incorporating it into the
PCC standards, but into the rare community=s standards as well.

 

Appreciation:




As the preceding report shows, the work of the Task Group could never
have been accomplished without the excellent input and cooperation of
the rare book community.  In fact, it could never have been done at all
if the DCRB rules had not been in existence in the first place.  The
rare book community deserves high praise for having such active,
thoughtful and articulate colleagues.

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20060301/b7b233a6/attachment.htm