[DCRM-L] ESTC and the revision of SCF

[Elizabeth Robinson]

Two folks have indicated it would be useful to get a real feel for what our scholars/researchers (non-librarians) would find the best approach. I think that is smart. 

How should we go about determining that?

Of course, we will have the veterans and the newbies among them (and all those in between). There will be a variance of opinion, and we have to decide how to respond to that (selecting the majority opinion or doing something else).

I suspect the tug between tradition and clarity will not be perfectly resolved, but perhaps some research of our clientele will provide us some insight to help us determine how to leap.

Elizabeth A. Robinson
Team Leader
Rare Book Cataloging Team
Special Materials Cataloging Division
Library of Congress
101 Independence Avenue SE, mailstop 4376
Washington, DC 20540-4376
(202)707-3408 (work)
(202)707-2453 (fax)
erob at loc.gov (email)

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed are strictly my own 
and not necessarily those of the Library of Congress. 


--- On Tue, 9/9/08, Randal Brandt <rbrandt at library.berkeley.edu> wrote:

> From: Randal Brandt <rbrandt at library.berkeley.edu>
> Subject: [DCRM-L] ESTC and the revision of SCF
> To: "DCRM-L" <dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu>
> Date: Tuesday, September 9, 2008, 11:46 AM
> As those of you who follow the work of the RBMS
> Bibliographic Standards 
> Committee already know, a revision of _Standard Citation
> Forms for Rare 
> Book Cataloging_ (SCF) is underway (please see the agenda
> and draft 
> minutes from the Bib Standards meeting held in Anaheim in
> June 2008 for 
> more information: 
> http://www.rbms.info/committees/bibliographic_standards/conference-docs/index.html)
> 
> One of the key principles of the revision is to make
> citations used in 
> bibliographic records (in MARC tag 510) more understandable
> to 
> researchers (and, by extension, other catalogers). In order
> to do that, 
> citations will be based, as much as possible, on the AACR2
> entries for 
> the works being cited. Current single-name or single-word
> citations will 
> be expanded.
> 
> However, at the Anaheim meeting, a lively discussion took
> place over the 
> citation for the ESTC. The room was basically split over
> what to do 
> about it. Many favored leaving it alone; "ESTC"
> is so widely known that 
> the existing citation is sufficient. Others favored
> following the new, 
> AACR2-based principle and expanding the citation to
> "English short title 
> catalogue."
> 
> At the meeting, it was decided to take the ESTC debate to
> this list and 
> see what the wider rare materials cataloging community
> thought about it. 
> I'll get the discussion rolling by stating my own
> opinion.
> 
> I am in the camp that believes that "ESTC" is OK
> as it is. The acronym 
> is sufficiently well-known and does not need to be spelled
> out. 
> Researchers and catalogers alike all know what it means.
> More 
> importantly, a title keyword search on "ESTC" in
> OCLC WorldCat retrieves 
> the bibliographic record for the resource.
> 
> What do the rest of you think?
> 
> Randal Brandt
> Chair, ACRL/RBMS Bibliographic Standards Committee
> 
> -- 
> __________________________
> Randal Brandt
> Principal Cataloger
> The Bancroft Library
> (510) 643-2275
> rbrandt at library.berkeley.edu
> http://bancroft.berkeley.edu
> "It's hard enough to remember my opinions without 
> remembering my reasons for them"--The Streets.