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

[Ann W. Copeland]

I am sorry, Erin, I was looking at S where we didn't do anything with 
App. C, we only used App. D.

No, this is not a big deal and does not have to go to BSC. The LDR/17=4 
is still valid so just keep it there.

Of course, since (G) is a coming together of LC and DCRM(Graphic) the 
BSR for Graphic Materials would be an appropriate discussion for App. C. 
I'm sorry!

And Jain's message (just received) is perfect.

Annie



On 11/30/2010 3:02 PM, Erin Blake wrote:
> Well, it looks like this isn't going to be resolved before the current draft of DCRM(G) gets made available in advance of the January 8 public hearing, at any rate (which should be in the next day or so). Is it something that should go on the BSC meeting agenda, especially if someone who isn't me can get an answer to Jain and Manon's questions about the future of LDR/17=4.
>
> > From what I can tell, the DCRM intention is that guidance come in three sizes: extra-small (i.e., minimal-level, using Appendix D as the floor), small (i.e., more than minimal but less than full, using Appendix C as the floor), and regular (full level, using the whole manual and its requirements as the floor).
>
> Annie, are you saying that Appendix C should be the "DCRM Core" as it were, and not make reference to the BSR except to direct PCC participants to consult that standard on their own? In theory, it wouldn't matter whether encoding level 4 goes away, since DCRM is theoretically MARC-independent.
>
>     EB.
>