[DCRM-L] Early works to 1800

[Young, Stephen]

Brava Jackie! Right on!
Stephen Young

From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Dooley,Jackie
Sent: Friday, April 23, 2010 5:19 PM
To: DCRM Revision Group List
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Early works to 1800

This discussion offers a terrific example of how rare book catalogers can contribute to simplification of cataloging without sacrificing useful data: make the blinkin’ subdivision free-floating already! :) Bob, I hope the SAC subcommittee finds a ton of other subdivisions that can have their application greatly simplified in addition to this one. Complex nuances such as that currently applied to the “Early works to 1800” subdivision  are the sort of triviality that give cataloging its well-deserved reputation for excessive complexity—and that prevent catalogers from fully applying their sophisticated brains to the aspects of their work that matter.

Lots of other interesting and useful thoughts expressed throughout this thread too. Kudos to all!

Jackie

P.S. Don’t get me started on |x History and |x Sources …

Jackie Dooley
Consulting Archivist
OCLC Research and the RLG Partnership

949.492.5060 (home/office)
949.295.1529 (mobile)
dooleyj at oclc.org

647 Camino de los Mares, Suite 108-240
San Clemente, CA 92673

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 11:21 AM
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/f4f9ecff/attachment.htm