[DCRM-L] Final call for discussion: DPC: first and lastsentences under "Optional local note "in VIII.2. also belongwith the previous instruction ("Local note")

[Erin Blake]

The significance is that we wanted to be concise when re-wording the
note, since it was becoming longer, and "applicable to the situation"
seemed redundant. You make the note if it's applicable. Full stop. If
it's applicable to a different situation than the one you have, then
it's not applicable. 

 

I somehow hadn't noticed that the phrase was used in "Note" as well,
though!

 

How about changing the first instance to just "applicable" as well? (The
phrase "applicable to the situation" only ever occurs here, in VIII.1).

 

   EB.

 

 

From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On
Behalf Of Deborah J. Leslie
Sent: Monday, February 07, 2011 5:28 PM
To: DCRM Revision Group List
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Final call for discussion: DPC: first and
lastsentences under "Optional local note "in VIII.2. also belongwith the
previous instruction ("Local note")

 

I think the re-wording is generally clearer; thanks.

But I wonder why the phrase "application to the situation" remains in
the definition of "Note", but "to the situation" has been deleted from
"Local note." The wording of the two notes should be consistent with
each other, and elsewhere in DCRM where "required if applicable"
instructions are given.  

 

From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On
Behalf Of Erin Blake
Sent: Sunday, 06 February, 2011 21:50
To: dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu
Subject: [DCRM-L] Final call for discussion: DPC: first and last
sentencesunder "Optional local note"in VIII.2. also belong with
theprevious instruction ("Local note")

 

BSC members will vote on the proposed change, below, on Monday, February
7. See http://connect.ala.org/node/129533 for a version that clearly
shows changed text.

 

Thanks,

 

   EB.

 

From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On
Behalf Of Erin Blake
Sent: Sunday, January 30, 2011 7:14 PM
To: dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu
Subject: [DCRM-L] DPC: first and last sentences under "Optional local
note"in VIII.2. also belong with the previous instruction ("Local note")

 

A couple of DCRM(G) reviewers noticed an anomaly in the placement of
parts of the "optional local note" definition in VIII.2 of DCRM. Namely,
the first and last sentences under "Optional local note" seem to apply
equally to "Local note" (which comes first) but are not stated there. 

 

Here are the definitions as published: 

 

*         "Note" indicates that the note is required if applicable to
the situation.

 

*         "Optional note" indicates that the note is not required.  The
labeling of a note as "optional" in these rules carries no judgment
about its importance (see introductory section IV); certain notes
designated as "optional" may in fact be almost universally applied.

 

*         "Local note" indicates a note describing copy-specific
information which is required if applicable to the situation (see 7B22).

 

*         "Optional local note" indicates that the note concerns
copy-specific information not affecting areas 1-6. It is not required,
but must be clearly identified as a local note according to the
provisions of 7B22.1.1.  Copy-specific information that does affect
areas 1-6, such as basing the description on an imperfect copy (see
0B2.5), is required and recorded in a general note.

 

Here's a proposed revision to "Local note" and "Optional local note"
that moves the information applicable to both into the first definition:


 

*         "Local note" indicates a note describing copy-specific
information not affecting areas 1-6 that is required if applicable (see
7B22). It must be clearly identified as a local note according to the
provisions of 7B22.1.1. Copy-specific information that does affect areas
1-6, such as basing the description on an imperfect copy (see 0B2.5), is
required and recorded in a general note.

 

*         "Optional local note" indicates that the note describing
copy-specific information is not required. 

 

Arguably, the sentence that begins "The labeling of a note as "optional"
in these rules..." should be repeated under "Optional local note," as
should the sentences about local notes affecting or not affecting areas
1-6, so that each definition is self-contained. In practice, though, the
wordiness doesn't seem necessary since the definitions are close
together in the paper version, and the links from the Cataloger's
Desktop table of contents go to the start of VIII.2 rather than the
individual concept.  

 

See http://connect.ala.org/node/129533 for an html view with added text
underlined and omitted text struck through.

 

BSC members will be asked to vote on this change, or a rephrased version
of it, on Monday, February 7, after a one-week discussion period on
DCRM-L.

 

Thanks,

 

   Erin.

 

--------------------------------------------------

Erin C. Blake, Ph.D.  |  Curator of Art & Special Collections  |  Folger
Shakespeare Library  |  201 E. Capitol St. SE  | Washington, DC
20003-1004  |  office tel. (202) 675-0323  |  fax:  (202) 675-0328  |
eblake at folger.edu  |  www.folger.edu

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20110207/a7e2ce06/attachment.htm