[DCRM-L] hand coloring and new descriptions

[Lapka, Francis]

On behalf of the DCRM2 task force, I would like community thoughts on what appears to be an inconsistency on the matter of Variations requiring a new record (Appendix E).



The draft of DCRM(C), rule E1.2 says: "... generally consider that a new bibliographic record is required whenever the material distinguishes itself from other variants by one or more of the following characteristics: ...



*         change in the presence of hand coloring, if there is evidence that the resource was issued both with and without the hand coloring (in case of doubt, assume the material was issued both ways)"

Contrast this to DCRM(G), rule E1.3, which says: "Examples of differences that do not in themselves necessarily signal the need for a new record in the absence of other differences include: ...


*         the presence or absence of hand-coloring


*         a difference in printed colors"

The other DCRM manuals do not explicitly treat the issue of color in this context. That said, the matter is still relevant to other formats. It is common, for example, for publishers of color-plate books to announce (on the item) the availability of the book in colored and uncolored versions, at different prices. In this circumstance, it is uncommon practice (as far as I know) to create separate records for the colored and uncolored versions.

The default DCRM guideline is to "assume that a separate bibliographic record [i.e. a new Manifestation?] will be created for each bibliographic variant that represents what is referred to as an 'edition' in AACR2 and an 'issue' in bibliographic scholarship." It's not a leap to argue that a difference in coloring meets the definition of a distinct issue (from DCRMB): "A group of published copies which constitutes a consciously planned publishing unit, distinguishable from other groups of published copies by one or more differences designed expressly to identify the group as a discrete unit."

I would like DCRM2 to take a consistent (and principled) stand on the matter, allowing (as DCRM does) for agencies to vary when it makes sense to do so. What, then, would make most sense as the default approach?

I've already received useful comments from members of the Cartographic team on this question, and I encourage them to chime in again here.

Thanks,
Francis








Francis Lapka  *  Catalog Librarian
Department of Rare Books and Manuscripts
Yale Center for British Art
203.432.9672  *  francis.lapka at yale.edu<mailto:francis.lapka at yale.edu>

BUILDING CONSERVATION PROJECT
The Center will be closed from January 2, 2015 through February 2016 for its Building Conservation Project<http://britishart.yale.edu/architecture/building-conservation-project>. Please email the Study Room<mailto:ycba.studyroom at yale.edu> and/or the Reference Library<mailto:ycba.reference at yale.edu> to request an appointment, which will be accommodated on a limited basis Tuesday-Friday, 10 am-4 pm, contingent upon the construction schedule.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20150226/13368d19/attachment.html>