[DCRM-L] Introduction comments

[Deborah J. Leslie]

Possibly because the definition of core-level cataloging is a BIBCO endeavor, is it not, whereas full-level cataloging did not originate with PCC. Therefore, mention of BIBCO requirements make sense in the section on core, but not necessarily in the section on full. 

__________________________________________
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   

-----Original Message-----
From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Manon Theroux
Sent: 21 September 2006 15:26
To: DCRM Revision Group List
Subject: RE: [DCRM-L] Introduction comments

You're right, Nina, at least for PCC full-level 
records. The BIBCO Manual seems pretty clear 
about it. I'm so glad you spoke up.

So, in the full-level section of the Intro, we need to strike:

"The name headings need not be established using 
authority records, although full authority work 
will generally result in greater consistency of headings and improved access."

And I suggest we include the following somewhere in that paragraph:

"If an institution is a BIBCO participant, 
contributing full-level records as part of the 
Program for Cooperative Cataloging (PCC), all 
headings must be established in the LC/NACO and LC/SACO Authority Files."

to parallel the text in the core-level section.

Now I wonder what led me/us to think the way we 
did. This text has been in the Pre-Cataloging 
Decisions section for a long time!

-Manon




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20060921/4187a216/attachment.htm