[DCRM-L] Square brackets for supplied and devised information in DCRM(G) (was: Re: Date of Production and Date of Manufacture elements - should a priority order be provided to prefer data in the resource itself first?)

[Erin Blake]

For the benefit of cataloging historians going through the DCRM-L archives in the future, I'd like to fill in some of the details behind DCRM(G)'s use of square brackets for all supplied and devised information in transcription fields (including for collections).

Inadvertently, Jackie hit the nail on the head when she noted "Catalogers understand the meaning of brackets." Previous picture-cataloging rules followed museum tradition by assuming one record per item, not one record per "title" as happens with bibliographic cataloging, where there's a long tradition of copy-cataloging. Now that picture catalogers are encouraged to start from OCLC records, the presence or absence of square brackets helps narrow down the possibilities when skimming a long list of near-matches in Connexion. For the time being, at any rate, square brackets remain important enough for catalogers that they weren't worth sacrificing.

Another argument in favor of square brackets came from real-life experience with data being harvested from catalogs in order to populate digital image collections: notes often get left behind in favor of "basic" creator, title, publisher, and date information. The presence of square brackets gives expert users the clue they need that there's more to the story.

DCRM(G) also uses square brackets for all supplied and devised information in transcription fields in order to make it easier for catalogers: there's one rule, no exceptions. Otherwise, you find yourself wondering if this untitled group of four landscapes was intended by the artist to be a set of the Four Seasons (multipart monograph: bracket); or does it just happen to be four landscapes on standard-sized paper (group/collection: no brackets)? RDA gives photographs as an example of a resource that "does not normally carry identifying information" -- but many photographs in special collections libraries do normally carry such information (stereograph cards are probably the most common of these).

I expect that future cataloging rules will drop square brackets in favor of some other indication of the source of information, but at present, there are still practical reasons for keeping it.

For what it's worth, the main reason for always noting the source of a picture's title is because the *lack* of square brackets isn't meaningful to the general public. When the Library of Congress catalog lists the book title "The pickaninny twins" it's a fair bet everyone knows that the Library of Congress didn't come up with the title. But when it lists the photograph title "Little Negro tea pickers singing pickaninny songs" without comment, it's a problem.

Cheers,

Erin.


----------------
Erin C. Blake, Ph.D.  |  Interim Head of Collection Information Services and Cataloging; Curator of Art & Special Collections  |  Folger Shakespeare Library  |  201 E. Capitol St. SE, Washington, DC, 20009  |  eblake at folger.edu  |  office tel. +1 202-675-0323  |  fax +1 202-675-0328  |  www.folger.edu