[DCRM-L] RBMS PS Review Q2.5: Transcription of Inaccuracies

[Noah Sheola]

I'm more in favor of falling in line with RDA on this one. If the
inaccuracy is corrected or commented upon in a note, it should be clear
enough to the user that the inaccuracy appears on the item itself and is
not a cataloger's error. I'm not crazy about the compromise in the current
draft (it's a compromise, so that is to be expected, I suppose). If there
are benefits in continuing to permit interpolated corrections at the
cataloger's discretion, I am not convinced the inconsistency across
cataloging agencies is worth it.
- Noah

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Lapka, Francis <francis.lapka at yale.edu>
wrote:

> We’d really like to hear from the community on this question – especially
> from current BSC members and anyone who was not on the task force.
>
>
>
> This may be the only area where the draft RBMS Policy Statements are
> clearly at odds with RDA guidance (of if not the only area, the area where
> they are *most* at odds). Do you agree with the outcome? Does it need
> clarification? Would you favor a different approach?
>
>
>
> Francis
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* DCRM-L [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] *On Behalf Of *Mascaro,
> Michelle
> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 13, 2017 2:22 PM
> *To:* DCRM Users' Group <dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu>
> *Subject:* [DCRM-L] RBMS PS Review Q2.5: Transcription of Inaccuracies
>
>
>
> As a follow-up to the initial discussion topics on transcription that I
> posted last week, I would like to solicit some discussion on the
> transcription of inaccuracies (RDA 1.7.9).  Under RDA, inaccuracies and
> misprints on the source are transcribed as, and, if considered important,
> the cataloger may make a note, correcting the inaccuracy. The AACR2/DCRM
> practice of using interpolations, such as sic and i.e., to note/correct the
> inaccuracy within the transcribed element is not permitted. The rationale
> being since transcribed fields are manifestation level elements, their
> purpose is to identify how the manifestation represents itself and
> corrections for access, etc., belong elsewhere.
>
>
>
> Whether there is a rare materials reason for the RBMS Policy Statements to
> vary from RDA and continue to follow the AACR2/DCRM practice of correcting
> transcribed inaccuracies via interpolation, prompted several discussions
> within the task force. Some of the arguments made for continuing
> interpolation included that inaccuracies are not uncommon in early print
> materials, and it is important for our users to be able to readily identify
> that the error is on the piece itself and not introduced by the cataloger.
> Members of the task force were split on this issue, and whether the
> practice of interpolation was too much of a departure from RDA proper to be
> justified.
>
>
>
> As a compromise, in the current draft, the default approach is to follow
> RDA (correct inaccuracies in notes) with an alternative to provide
> correction via sic. or i.e. within the transcription for catalogers
> interested in doing so. (The argument for using Latin abbreviations is that
> they are common usage in the rare materials bibliography and known to our
> users (RDA principle 0.4.3.7)).  One concern that has since been raised is
> by allowing two options, the transcription for the same resource would be
> different depending on if the cataloger is electing to follow the
> alternative or not.
>
>
>
> Since this is one of the most significant variations from RDA proposed in
> the RBMS PS, I would like to extend this discussion on how the PS should
> handle the transcription of inaccuracies to the broader community and
> solicit your thoughts.  Comments to  the questions I posed last week are
> still encouraged as well.
>
>
>
> Also, attached is an updated version of the RBMS PS to 1.7, with some
> improved examples from the examples group.  With the holidays approaching,
> this will be the last discussion question I post before the new year.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
>
>
> Michelle Mascaro
>
> Head, Special Collections Metadata
>
> University of California, San Diego
>
> (858) 534-6759 <(858)%20534-6759>
>
> mmascaro at ucsd.edu
>
>
>



-- 
Noah Sheola
Special Collections Cataloging Librarian
Burns Library
Boston College
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20171219/a281cb0c/attachment.html>