[DCRM-L] RDA discussion topics for CC:DA at Midwinter

[Matthew C. Haugen]

Greetings,

CC:DA has three discussion papers on its Midwinter agenda that may be of
interest to the DCRM community. Any initial feedback prior to Midwinter
will help me participate in the discussion of these topics during CC:DA’s
meetings, but ongoing discussion and feedback is certainly encouraged
during or after Midwinter as well. I raise a few specific points for each
of the proposals below but invite your comments on any aspect of these
papers.

1. Multiple Sources for Statements of Responsibility:
http://alcts.ala.org/ccdablog/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/KPG201501.pdf

This discussion paper highlights a potential ambiguity in RDA instructions
regarding source(s) for statements of responsibility. While DCRM may
continue to differ from RDA regarding the recording of statements not taken
from the same source as the title proper, an attempt to clarify these
ambiguous instructions may be an opportunity to help RDA better accommodate
rare materials practices.

Do any one of the four interpretations offered by the paper strike you as
preferable, and if so, do you suggest any specific changes to the RDA
language which would support that interpretation?

2. Structured descriptions of related manifestations:
http://alcts.ala.org/ccdablog/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/CCDA_TF_InstructionsforRecordingRelationships_6.pdf

In particular, pages 5-7 of this paper propose specific instructions for
relating manifestations to reproductions and facsimiles, followed by a set
of more general instructions. While the general instructions strike me as
vague, the more specific instructions seem to be over-defined to the
exclusion of manuscripts and their facsimiles. Do you think the general
instructions will suffice, or are separate specific instructions necessary
for each type of related manifestation?

3. Describing Accompanying Material:
http://alcts.ala.org/ccdablog/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/CCDA_TF_InstructionsforRecordingRelationships_7.pdf

This discussion paper proposes relationship designators and instructions
for describing the form and extent of accompanying material (e.g. score and
parts, book and CD-Rom, etc.). My cursory read-through didn’t identify any
obvious rare materials objections. I do wonder whether the appendix J
definitions (on page 7 in this paper) should be amended to include “bound
with” at the manifestation level, not just at the item level, for
manifestations bound together as issued.

Thank you for your participation,

Matthew Haugen
RBMS Liaison to CC:DA

-- 

-- 
Matthew C. Haugen
Rare Book Cataloger
102 Butler Library
Columbia University Libraries
E-mail: matthew.haugen at columbia.edu
Phone: 212-851-2451
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20150126/e714b63b/attachment.html>