[DCRM-L] Quoted notes was Area 2 comments

[Manon Theroux]

I've made the distinction between these two types 
of notes for many years and, obviously, I agree 
with Randy's assessment that changing the note as 
has been suggested would imply that the phrase 
itself appeared over a span of pages.

I've included snippets from various cataloging 
standards and guidelines below, in the hopes that 
it will help to resolve the issue (which I never 
imagined would be so controversial!)

-Manon

====================================
CONTENTS NOTES:

MARC21, under 505$a:
500 ## $a"Table of statutes and regulations": p. xvii-xxv.
[Unformatted content note recorded in field 500.]

MARC21, under 504$a:
504 ## $a"Selected bibliography": v. 1, p. 351-358, v. 2, p. 234-236.

LCRI 2.7B18. "Contents":
500 ## $a "Life cycle of the liver fluke": leaves 75-89.
500 ## $a "Types of prayer wheels found in south 
central Tibet, by Mei Lin": p. [310]-[375].

DCRB, 7C16 "Contents":
"List of the author's unpublished poems": p. 151-158

Finally, in the book "Notes in the catalog 
record" by Jerry Saye and Sherry Vellucci, see 
the *many* examples in the two sections on the 
use of quoted titles in informal contents notes (p. 398 and p. 400).

========================================
QUOTATION NOTES:

MARC21, under 500$a:
500 ## $a"The first American Jewish weekly of its 
kind"--The Jewish encyclopedia, v. 8.

AACR2, 1.7 "Quotations":
“A textbook for 6th form students”–Pref.
“Generally considered to be by William 
Langland”–Oxford companion to English literature

DCRB, 7B3 Form of notes, "Quotations"
"Generally considered to be by William 
Langland"--Harvey, P. Oxford companion to Engl. lit.
"The principal additional music, contained in 72 
pages, may be had, half bound, with or without 
the rules, price four shillings and ninepence"--Pref.

Many other examples are scattered throughout various rules....

========================================

At 01:36 PM 9/20/2006, you wrote:
>No, I confess that I do not get the same inference from the format of
>"Preface to the first edition"--P. 5-7 as does Randy. As far as I'm
>aware, I've always treated words within quotation marks the same,
>whether they're quoting the location of a string of words or indicating
>the location of a section by its title.
>______________________________________________________
>Deborah J. Leslie, M.A., M.L.S.
>Chair, RBMS Bibliographic Standards Committee
>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
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On
>Behalf Of Will Evans
>Sent: Wednesday, 20 September, 2006 13:01
>To: 'DCRM Revision Group List'
>Subject: [DCRM-L] Quoted notes was Area 2 comments
>
>Mr. Brandt wrote:
>
>   "Preface to the first edition"--P. 5-7. (and, yes, you would have
>to capitalize the "P.")
>
>This implies, to me, that the phrase "Preface to the first edition"
>spans
>pages 5 through 7, which is obviously absurd.
>
>
>Does the format of the above quoted note have the same implication to
>the
>rest of the RBMS community as it does to Mr. Brandt? I'm afraid I use
>this
>format all the time. To me it implies text with the title "Preface to
>the
>first edition" can be found on p. 5-7.  Is this wrong?
>
>Thanks in advance,
>
>Will.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20060920/ff1f7497/attachment.htm