[DCRM-L] DCRM(M) questions

[Schneider, Nina]

The Music and Cartographics modules should be parallel, I think. Perhaps the editors of DCRMC could pipe in here. Personally (and only personally) I think we should leave it fairly generic as RDA-ized DCRM is still a moving target.


Nina


+----------
Nina Schneider
Head Cataloger
William Andrews Clark Memorial Library
University of California, Los Angeles
2520 Cimarron Street
Los Angeles, CA  90018

(323) 731-8529
nschneider at humnet.ucla.edu
http://www.humnet.ucla.edu/humnet/clarklib/
________________________________
From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu <dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu> on behalf of Nancy Lorimer <nlorimer at stanford.edu>
Sent: Monday, June 8, 2015 12:42 PM
To: DCRM Revision Group List
Subject: [DCRM-L] DCRM(M) questions

Hi all,

There is a week left to be sure, but I haven't received any real feedback as yet. I thought I might start things going by addressing my first general question, based on the following comment from the CC:DA/MLA task force.


DCRM(M) and RDA:

It is our understanding that as of January 1, 2015, BIBCO catalogers are no longer allowed to use a non­RDA compliant standard for new BIBCO­authenticated cataloging.  The BSRs for individual material types have been combined into a single PCC RDA BIBCO Standard Record (BSR) Metadata Application Profile4 , with guidelines that provide for the combination of RDA and the other published DCRM modules.

We are glad to learn that rare music provisions have already been included in the BSR, and that the description conventions code dcrmm has been established in advance of the publication of DCRM(M). It is our understanding that BIBCO­authenticated records can thus be coded as both RDA and DCRM(M) compliant, as is the case with the other published DCRM modules, and that this option is available for non­BIBCO records as well. While this was not the case at the time of publication of the other modules, the DCRM(M) text has the opportunity to indicate that catalogers will have these options. Therefore we recommend that this situation be discussed with the PCC Standing Committee on Standards, and suggest further clarification in DCRM(M) instructions on the possible combination of rules and conventions. This impacts the Introduction (specifically II.1? X.1.3? footnote 4), Appendix A, and Appendix B1.3.

My question. We have the note agreed upon when the Graphics volume was published: "The relationship between the DCRM manuals and RDA is evolving. Current guidelines and other information can be found on the RBMS website at <http://rbms.info/committees/bibliographic_standards/dcrm/rda/dcrm-rda-html>."
<http://rbms.info/committees/bibliographic_standards/dcrm/rda/dcrm-rda-html>

Should we keep this or consider a change as suggested above? Whichever way, I will note that the link does not work anymore. It should be:http://rbms.info/dcrm/rda/

thanks
Nancy

--
Nancy Lorimer
Head, Metadata Dept
Stanford University Libraries
nlorimer at stanford.edu<mailto:nlorimer at stanford.edu>
650-725-8819
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20150608/4f4bb05e/attachment.html>