[DCRM-L] DPC: 4B3. Supplied modern forms of place names

[Manon Theroux]

I won't shed any tears if the Madridii counter example is deleted. But
I don't think the deletion is strictly necessary, given that VIII.1.
"Examples" already says "The examples are not in themselves
prescriptive ..."

If we wanted to keep a counter example for illustrative purposes, we
could perhaps revise the comment along these lines:

but Madridii
     (Comment: If considered recognizable as “Madrid” without
qualification according to the judgment of an individual cataloger or
the policy of an individual institution)

-Manon

On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Erin Blake <EBlake at folger.edu> wrote:
> Here’s another one that met with general approval at the DCRM(G) hearing.
> What do you think, collective wisdom? BSC members will be asked to vote on
> the issue on January 31.
>
>
>
> Proposal: Omit the counter-example and comment in 4B3 (Supplied modern forms
> of place names). Leave the rule and other examples unchanged.
>
>
>
> New version:
>
> 4B3. Supplied modern forms of place names
>
> If considered necessary for identification and if known, supply in square
> brackets the modern form of the name of the place. Use an English form of
> the name, if there is one.
>
>     Christiania [Oslo]
>
>     Eboracum [York]
>
>     Monachii [Munich]
>
>
>
> Rationale: DCRM shouldn't prescribe what is recognizable without
> qualification. What is considered “necessary for identification” should be
> up to cataloger judgment and institutional policy.
>
>
>
> See http://connect.ala.org/node/128806 for the html version, with the old
> text crossed out.

--
Manon Théroux
Head of Technical Services
U.S. Senate Library
SR-B15 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC  20510-7112