[DCRM-L] Deletion of copy-specific fields/data from OCLC master?

[Noble, Richard]

The model for doing what Ted suggests with copy-specific information
already exists in, for example, ESTC. In theory, the general
bibliographical record is clean, containing information about the
manifestation as such--which may well include information based on evidence
found in a copy or set of copies, such copies really falling within the
scope of reference sources. The holdings data include copy-specific
descriptive elements, available in an optional "holdings details" display.
See, for instance ESTC S111228.

This approach requires conscious effort and conscientious editing; it
cannot simply be compiled from such a wildly inconsistent jungle beast as
the WorldCat. One appreciates the efforts of its editors to to de-dup and
group and otherwise try to make something FRBRish out of it--but FRBR is
not cataloging, it's bibliography, which doesn't just happen, and requires
a high degree of bibliographical intelligence and tolerance for the tedium
of paying attention to 10K+ actual books, most of which are much of a
muchness.

That is to say: it is especially  tedious to establish what is normal, so
that exceptions may be accurately perceived--which includes knowing when
copy-specific information actually does contribute to understanding of a
manifestation as such.* It is also tedious, but at least of interest to
many now writing in the  field of book history, to compile data about
copies as such, and what they tell us generally about publishing, reading,
and authorship. It is no help to them to bury such data almost randomly in
general bibliographic records that are properly focused on the
dissemination of texts *grosso modo*, data that become mostly noise in the
collection-specific discovery resources of individual libraries.

*Of course, it also helps to develop one's sense of what an elusive quality
"normality" may be. The contents of the latest PBSA illustrate that
wonderfully, in articles about early American stereotype printing, the
textual history of Virgil 1469-1850, and music printing in late c17-early
c18 Italy.

RICHARD NOBLE :: RARE MATERIALS CATALOGUER :: JOHN HAY LIBRARY
BROWN UNIVERSITY  ::  PROVIDENCE, R.I. 02912  ::  401-863-1187
<Richard_Noble at Br <RICHARD_NOBLE at BROWN.EDU>own.edu>

On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Ted P Gemberling <tgemberl at uab.edu> wrote:

> Jane,
>
> I didn’t really mean to say you were doing research on the author. I just
> meant that if you included that note, you were apparently trying to help
> researchers on the author. That’s an honorable effort. I just wonder if
> it’s sustainable in the long run, especially given the amount of local
> information people could put on records. Right now I’m cataloging a book
> from 1737 with a record with 53 holdings. If every library put local notes
> on, the record would be a mess. But as Allison says, maybe there’s some way
> to improve the display mechanisms.
>
>
>
> Ted
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20151217/15ade525/attachment.html>