[DCRM-L] RBMS PS review Q4: Extent of text

[Erin Blake]

My thoughts on the Extent of text RBMS PS draft:

   - Yes, keep the square brackets convention (see what everyone else has
   already said for the Rare Materials justification).
   - No on "i.e." -- there isn't a rare materials reason to avoid "that is"
   when cataloging in English. HOWEVER it's important to include the
   punctuation that RDA uses: retain the comma after "that is" when using
   square brackets: 564 [that is, 56] leaves
   - Yes on removing the option of summarizing a complicated statement in
   the Extent statement then giving the full statement in a note: if you're
   giving a full statement of extent, it belongs where statements of extent go.


I know that "[sic]" isn't part of this PS topic, but because it has come up
already: it's important to keep it. The rare material reason for deviating
is that errors are more frequently encountered in the material, and knowing
about them is important for researchers. Identifying them in-line as part
of the original, and not a cataloger's typo, is justified. It's a
legitimate word in English use, there is no accepted English equivalent,
and it's not an abbreviation. And unlike [!], it has only one conventional
meaning (indeed, even after decades of working with cataloging conventions,
I still read it as "Woah! Can you believe that?!")

Thanks,

Erin.


----------------
Erin C. Blake, Ph.D.  |  Head of Collection Information Services  |  Folger
Shakespeare Library  |  201 E. Capitol St. SE, Washington, DC, 20003  |
eblake at folger.edu  |  office tel. +1 202-675-0323  |  fax +1 202-675-0328
|  www.folger.edu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20180404/ae0ccc45/attachment.html>