[DCRM-L] Going from Core-Level to BIBCO Standard Record in DCRM(G)

[Fletcher, Jain]

Hi, everyone,
   I think it would be worth checking with PCC about who can create BSRs. From a lot of talk I've heard (almost none of it official; only scuttlebutt from PCC members), my guess is that their idea (hope, dream!) is that everyone would adopt the BSC as a "floor".  Also, from the group of people (but I cannot remember if this has been declared yet by PCC), the core record is going away. Period. The rationale I've heard is that it is OCLC that drove this change, since it wants to do away with the non-MARC "Encoding level" 4, because it causes them some trouble.  So, for any of the DCRMs making changes to Appendix C, we need to make sure we've got this right.  My comments above are the assumptions we were expecting to base our App. C in DCRM(M) on, but we hadn't yet moved forward beyond slight mentions of that possibility ...  (And until this question came up just now, it hadn't occurred to me to articulate this to everyone else, either. So, many apologies for my omission...)                                                         --Jain



Jain Fletcher

Principal Cataloger & Head, Technical Services Division

Department of Special Collections

Young Research Library - UCLA Box 951575

Los Angeles, CA 90095-1575

v: (310) 794-4096

f: (310) 206-1864

e: jfletchr at library.ucla.edu





-----Original Message-----
From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Manon Theroux
Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2010 7:57 PM
To: DCRM Revision Group List
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Going from Core-Level to BIBCO Standard Record in DCRM(G)



I think you've got it right, Erin.



Though I'm not a BIBCO cataloger...



Also, I think core-level records can still be created by anyone - the

MARC21 definition simply says "Less-than-full but greater-than-minimal

level cataloging record that meets core record standards for

completeness" and is not tied to the former PCC standard - but I'm not

sure which "core record standard" the records would be conforming to.



-Manon



On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 7:42 PM, Erin Blake <EBlake at folger.edu> wrote:

> Can someone read over my assumptions, below, and let me know if they're

> accurate?

>

> a) Core-level records could be created by anyone, and were recognizable by

> the "4" in Leader/17; those created by BIBCO participants were recognizable

> by "pcc" in the 042 in ADDITION TO the "4" in Leader/17.

>

> b) BIBCO Standard Records can only be created by BIBCO participants because

> they are recognizable only by the presence of "pcc" in the 042 (and only

> BIBCO participants can code "pcc")

>

> Therefore... DCRM(G) Appendix C, which is being re-worded to cover the new

> BSR for Graphic Materials instead of the old Core Record Standard for

> Graphic Materials, can say ALL headings in DCRM(G) BSRs must be supported by

> national-level authority records (because, unlike Core records, only members

> of the PCC  BIBCO program can create BSRs).

>

> Alternatively, DCRM(G) Appendix C could be re-written to cover "Standard

> records" as opposed to "BIBCO Standard Records," but that would imply that

> the Bib Standards Committee of RBMS considers BIBCO's definition of a

> standard record to be the appropriate default (and there would be no way to

> tell from the record that mandatory DCRM fields were missing). Note that,

> unlike books, where there is a separate BSR MAP for Rare Books, there is

> only one MAP for Graphic Materials.



--

Manon Theroux

Head of Technical Services

U.S. Senate Library
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20101129/a6f161e1/attachment.htm