[DCRM-L] ESTC and the revision of SCF

[Randal Brandt]

Thank you to everyone who has responded so far. As Bob suggests, I will
pose this question to EXLIBRIS in the next day or two. I agree that it is
a good idea to get opinions from other user groups.

In the meantime, please keep the discussion going here.

Randy

> 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.
>
>
>


-- 
Randal Brandt
The Bancroft Library
http://bancroft.berkeley.edu
rbrandt at library.berkeley.edu