[DCRM-L] Oops on digraphs

[Noble, Richard]

And I suppose that, for some obscure reason, the BSC doesn't want to get
involved in the business of quarterly Cataloger's Desktop updates...

	-----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: Wednesday, January 09, 2008 3:22 PM
	To: DCRM Revision Group List
	Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Oops on digraphs
	
	

	It doesn't matter only because we've already got DCRM(B) in
print. The deletion of that sentence from the LCRI came just months
after our discussion on "reconsidering digraphs;" I'm just really,
really sorry that it slipped by all of us. 

	 

	__________________________ 
	Deborah J. Leslie, M.A., M.L.S. 
	Head of Cataloging 
	Folger Shakespeare Library 
	201 East Capitol St., S.E. 
	Washington, D.C. 20003 
	202.675-0369 
	djleslie at folger.edu | 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 Richard Noble
	Sent: Wednesday, 09 January, 2008 15:09
	To: DCRM Revision Group List; ElizRob at alum.emory.edu; DCRM
Revision Group List
	Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Oops on digraphs

	 

	I suppose it doesn't matter that in this respect, at least
(though not in others), DCRM and LCRI diverge, even though the intent of
the DCRM instructions was to bring them into conformity with LCRI? That
was a concession, after all--and is now an anomalous legacy--since the
divergences from AACR are all otherwise in the direction of more exact
transcription.
	
	Anyway, as I noted previously, the deletion of the sentence in
question was quite recent (CSB 112, summer 2005) and perhaps rather too
hard to spot.
	
	RICHARD NOBLE : RARE BOOKS CATALOGER : JOHN HAY LIBRARY : BROWN
UNIVERSITY
	PROVIDENCE, RI 02912 : 401-863-1187/FAX 863-2093 :
RICHARD_NOBLE at BROWN.EDU 
	
	At 1/9/2008    11:20 AM, Deborah J. Leslie wrote:
	
	

	For DCRM cataloging, the "simplification" of the LCRI makes no
	difference, because explicit instructions are written in the
rules.
	However, the discussion should be opened again when it's time
for
	revision. It may be a whole new world out there by then.
Speaking of
	which, did anybody read Michael Gorman's piece in the Dec 2007
_American
	Libraries_ about RDA? I was looking forward to the letters
section in
	the Jan/Feb 2008 issue, only to be dismayed that the whole space
was
	taken up with responses ad nauseum to the English only article. 
	
	_____________________________
	Deborah J. Leslie, M.A., M.L.S.
	Head of Cataloging
	Folger Shakespeare Library
	djleslie at folger.edu
	http://www.folger.edu 
	
	
	 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20080109/dbdab47b/attachment.htm