[DCRM-L] AMREMM and RDA

Tue Apr 24 07:35:50 MDT 2018

Except for expanding abbreviations, those examples are all already okay
with MARC and DCRM, so I don't think you have too much to worry about.
Separately bracketing elements was an ISBD change that was explicitly
brought into the DCRM suite with DCRM(G), for example.

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

On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 6:39 PM Matthew C. Haugen <
matthew.haugen at columbia.edu> wrote:

> Here is a follow-up question in the meantime; although a record (it seems)
> cannot be explicitly dual-coded as 040 $e amremm $e rda, I expect that
> access points would generally now be RDA-compliant; are there any arguments
> in favor or against allowing other RDA-flavored hybrid practices into $e
> amremm records not explicitly accounted for in the AMREMM manual?
>
> For example: using 264_0 instead of 260; adding 33x fields; 563 instead of
> 500 for Binding descriptions; bracketing supplied data in adjacent
> subfields separately rather than inclusively; expanding abbreviations?
>
> Thank you for your input,
>
> Matt
>
> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 10:55 AM, Deborah J. Leslie <DJLeslie at folger.edu>
> wrote:
>
>> With a 2003 publication, AMREMM* would be ready for revision, even
>> without the need to reconsider its principles and provisions in light of
>> RDA. A couple of points of interest that put it conceptually outside the
>> DCRM suite:
>>
>>
>>
>> 1.      Although published by the BSC through our parent body ACRL, it
>> has a personal author, Gregory Pass. He consulted widely with the BSC and
>> other groups, and generally (if not always) accommodated our suggestions,
>> but at the end of the day, he is the author.
>>
>>
>>
>> 2.     Gregory's remit was to align scholarly conventions used in
>> describing medieval manuscripts with library descriptive conventions based
>> on AACR2. One of the main deviations in practice is that of main entry.
>> 1.1B6, for example, gives main entries in examples of devising titles, and
>> it is clear that the manuscript as a physical object is the source of main
>> entry.
>>
>>
>> [Books of hours : use of Rouen]
>>
>> *Main entry under**: Catholic Church*
>>
>> *Uniform title**: Book of hours (Ms. National Art Library.
>> MSL/1902/1654)*
>>
>> *Added entry under**: National Art Library (Great Britain). Manuscript.
>> MSL/1902/1654*
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> It's sensible that manuscripts of all time periods should be considered
>> together. It will be interesting to see what comes of it.
>>
>>
>>
>> *I can't resist bringing up a quip I made at the time, which I thought
>> was funny but not sure anyone else did. Since the title is *De*scriptive
>> *C*ataloging of *A*ncient, *M*edieval, *R*enaissance, and *E*arly *M*odern
>> *M*anuscripts, we missed the chance of acronyming it DECAMREMM.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Deborah J. Leslie | Folger Shakespeare Library | djleslie at folger.edu |
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* DCRM-L [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] *On Behalf Of *Lapka,
>> Francis
>> *Sent:* Thursday, 07 September, 2017 08:20
>>
>> *To:* DCRM Users' Group
>> *Subject:* Re: [DCRM-L] AMREMM and RDA
>>
>>
>>
>> Thank you Matt for providing a good summary of where things stand. To
>> this I'll add that BSR guidelines for manuscripts are in development.
>> A draft will be shared with this list soon.
>>
>>
>>
>> In 2018, I expect that the RBMS Bibliographic Standards Committee will
>> initiate additional activity concerning manuscripts and RDA. At that time,
>> we'll consider options such as those that Matt has described.
>>
>>
>> Francis
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Francis Lapka  ·  Catalog Librarian
>>
>> Dept. of Rare Books and Manuscripts
>>
>> Yale Center for British Art
>>
>> 203.432.9672 <(203)%20432-9672>  ·  francis.lapka at yale.edu
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> *From:* DCRM-L <dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu> on behalf of Matthew C.
>> Haugen <matthew.haugen at columbia.edu>
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 6, 2017 4:41 PM
>> *To:* DCRM Users' Group
>> *Subject:* Re: [DCRM-L] AMREMM and RDA
>>
>>
>>
>> HI Ryan,
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm not aware of any information on creating RDA-compliant AMREMM
>> records.
>>
>>
>>
>> The BIBCO and CONSER standard record profiles contain provisions for
>> creating RDA-compliant DCRM records for all of the AACR2-based DCRM
>> manuals, except for DCRM (MSS), though I believe that update is pending.
>>
>>
>>
>> And the DCRM Task Force had postponed work on manuscript materials of all
>> time periods when drafting the RBMS Policy Statements for RDA-based rare
>> materials instructions, so that work remains to be done for modern
>> manuscripts as well.
>>
>>
>>
>> I wonder if any of these options might be feasible or desirable for BSC
>> to pursue?
>>
>>
>>
>> 1. Publish an RDA-compliant revision to AMREMM as a standalone manual,
>> like the original.
>>
>> 2. Draft additional RBMS Policy Statements for these materials, that when
>> published along with the rest of RBMS-PS, would supersede AMREMM.
>>
>> 3. Submit provisions to be added to the BSR profile for creating
>> RDA-compliant records using AMREMM as it currently stands, similar to the
>> current arrangement with the other DCRM manuals.
>>
>> 4. Publish its own similar application profile for creating RDA-compliant
>> records using AMREMM as it currently stands,  without going through LC/PCC.
>>
>>
>>
>> Matt
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 5:28 PM, Ryan Hildebrand <rhilde at uoregon.edu>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>>
>>
>> Can anyone point me to helpful information on creating RDA compliant
>> AMREMM records? I don’t have specific questions at the moment, but would
>> like to understand issues others may have already tackled.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>
>>
>> Ryan Hildebrand
>>
>> Authorities & Special Collections Cataloging Librarian
>>
>> University of Oregon Libraries
>>
>> 1299 University of Oregon
>>
>> Eugene OR 97403-1299
>>
>> (541) 346-1844
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> --
>> Matthew C. Haugen
>> Rare Book Cataloger
>> 102 Butler Library
>> Columbia University Libraries
>> E-mail: matthew.haugen at columbia.edu
>> Phone: 212-851-2451 <(212)%20851-2451>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> --
> Matthew C. Haugen
> Rare Book Cataloger
> 102 Butler Library
> Columbia University Libraries
> E-mail: matthew.haugen at columbia.edu
> Phone: 212-851-2451 <(212)%20851-2451>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20180424/74d7881b/attachment-0001.html>