[DCRM-L] ESTC and the revision of SCF

Tue Sep 9 18:29:33 MDT 2008

I completely agree with you, Donald, about Bleiler and Reginald. I think this sort of laconic citation is horrible, and I do do science fiction and have no idea what they are. I think, however, the argument that has been put forward is that "ESTC" is not laconic, given the arguments that have already been made, and additionally given that the database itself refers to itself as "ESTC" (see its main page). I don't think anybody's arguing in favor of keeping those impossible Bleilers and Reginalds. It's a matter of judgment on what's laconic and what's not.

I also don't agree that catalogers should not be consulted on this question (i.e. we are the "wrong" focus group), since we are the ones who will have to do a great deal of work to revise tens of thousands of records (at least in my catalog I want all my records citing sources like this to appear in a uniform way since they're indexed) if a change is made. Balancing the benefits of a change (if any) against the amount of work needed to effect the change, is always appropriate. So catalogers are "a" right focus group to consult. Several of us have also pointed out that we are not the only group that should be consulted, and I hope this question will find its way to exlibris (perhaps with a summary of the cataloger point of view, if one exists).

Bob

Robert L. Maxwell
Head, Special Collections and Metadata Catalog Dept.
6728 Harold B. Lee Library
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
(801)422-5568

From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of dfarren
Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 6:11 PM
To: 'DCRM Revision Group List'
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] ESTC and the revision of SCF

In the face of UNITED OPPOSITION from YOU CATALOGUERS, I argue in favor of the expanded form, "English short title catalogue," thinking that the purpose of citations is to serve the ignorant, not the knowledgeable. The knowledgeable know not only what ESTC means but also that a relevant publication will be cited in ESTC without being told so. There is nothing wrong with being ignorant when out of one's field. For instance, I recently encountered a book by a poet that was cited (in a bookseller's catalogue, granted) as "Bleiler ..." and "Reginald ..." Given such laconic citations I had to take the trouble to educate myself that these works are bibliographies of science fiction. I think of the author in question as a poet without knowing anything about science fiction, but those who think of the author as a writer of science fiction know immediately what Bleiler and Reginald are. I would have been helped by an expanded citation, the knowledgeable of science fiction didn't need help.

My second argument is that YOU CATALOGUERS are not the right focus group to consult on this question .

Donald Farren

4009 Bradley Lane

Chevy Chase, MD 20815-5238

dfarren at concentric.net

voice 301.951.9479

fax 301.951.3898

mobile 301.768.8972

-----Original Message-----
From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Randal Brandt
Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 11:46 AM
To: DCRM-L
Subject: [DCRM-L] ESTC and the revision of SCF

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.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20080909/3799286a/attachment.htm 