[DCRM-L] Early works to 1800

[Deborah J. Leslie]

The ESTC did use the subdivision on all of its subject headings for STC
and Wing records, disregarding all provisions given in the SCM H 1576.
Subject headings were not made for the original, 18c phase of the
project, but were later added through a machine process drawing on
records in OCLC. Most of those subject headings comply more or less with
the SCM.  

 

 

From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On
Behalf Of Young, Stephen
Sent: Friday, 23 April, 2010 14:54
To: DCRM Revision Group List
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Early works to 1800

 

I think we probably want to keep the subdivision, but it certainly has
been used inconsistently over the years. For many years it was not
supposed to be applied to theological works. If the scope were extended
to make it completely free floating, it would simplify things for
catalogers. Even though I've been using the subdivision for years, I
still have to check the scope from time to time. My observation is that
the ESTC project used the subdivision for everything in many of its
records. When adapting their records, our catalogers had to strip out
the subdivision to conform to LC practice.

 

I don't see much utility in a 655 Early works to 1800 except for very
small collections where such works would be an oddity.   

 

Stephen R. Young
Rare Book Team Leader
Catalog and Metadata Services
Sterling Memorial Library
Box 208240
New Haven, CT 06520-8240

Tel.: 203-432-8385
Fax: 203-432-7231

Email: stephen.young at yale.edu

 

 

 

 

From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On
Behalf Of Robert Maxwell
Sent: Friday, April 23, 2010 2:21 PM
To: DCRM Revision Group List
Subject: [DCRM-L] Early works to 1800

 

Hello, all,

 

I'm on a SAC subcommittee making recommendations for the disposition of
the genre/form subdivisions established as 185 records in the subject
authority file. We're discussing the subdivision -Early works to 1800
right now.

 

First, I assume we want to be able to continue using this as a
subdivision in 650 (etc.), correct?

 

Second, would there be interest in expanding its scope? At the moment
it's only allowed "under names of countries, cities, etc., and under
classes of persons, ethnic groups, and topical headings for individual
works written or issued before 1800." E.g., it can't be used under names
of persons in 600 fields; in addition, SCM 1576 forbids its use in the
following situations:

 

5.  When to omit the subdivision.  Do not use the subdivision in
situations for which the passage of time is of little consequence,
including the following: 

*   under names of persons, corporate bodies (except for geographic
names), or individual works (except sacred works) 

*   historical works; chronologies 

*   under headings with dates, or period subdivisions; under headings
with period qualifiers, for example, Science, Ancient 

*   works of belles lettres; works about belles lettres

 

I would personally like to see the subdivision become completely free
floating, i.e., allowed in any subject string without the omission
requirements of SCM 1576. What do the rest of you think?

 

Third, would there be interest in establishing the term "Early works to
1800" (or something similar) as a genre/form term, allowing its use in
655? 

 

Thanks,

Bob 

 

 

Robert L. Maxwell

Special Collections and Ancient Languages Catalog Librarian

Genre/Form Authorities Librarian

6728 Harold B. Lee Library

Brigham Young University

Provo, UT 84602

(801)422-5568 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20100423/d3e48ec2/attachment.htm