[DCRM-L] spotting a preface before subfield c in 510s

[Theroux, Manon]

Hi, all—

Sorry for the late response. Just to add to what Randy and Deborah have already said, based on my memory and a cursory look through some old documents:

The issue of whether to use the word “entry” in 510 $c (for works with numbered entries) was the subject of much debate during the last SCF revision process. Initial drafts did require it (as a parallel to the use of “page”, “column”, etc.). The instruction was:

“If a bibliography or catalog is numbered, record the number of the entry exactly as it appears in the source, including the punctuation marks (e.g., hyphen, full stop, etc.) found in the source. Include the term “entry” before the entry number.”

After much back and forth, it was subsequently decided to loosen that requirement.

I can sympathize with Bob’s unhappiness about inconsistent data and maintenance issues, but to try to answer his question ("What purpose could artificially adding the word “entry” possibly have?"), I thought I'd mention a couple of the arguments I recall being made by those in favor of including the word “entry”.

A primary concern was that users not familiar with SCF practices (of which I'm sure there are many!) do not know whether a citation number by itself indicates a page number or an entry number. The user can easily assume that a number without a caption refers to a page number. A caption (such as “entry”) can remove that ambiguity (or at least lessen it). For example, a user might assume this citation refers to page 25:
Evans, C. American bibliography, 25

Also, it is not unusual for a citation form to end with a number (or a range of numbers). When numbers at the end of a citation form are then followed by a citation number (without a caption), it can be especially confusing for users looking at the public display in a catalog. For example:

Jumonville, F.M. Bibliography of New Orleans imprints, 1764-1864, 1852

Hale, J.R. “Newberry Library supplement to the foreign books in M.J.D. Cockle’s A bibliography of English military books up to 1642 and of contemporary foreign works.” In Papers of the Bibliographical Society of America, volume 55 (1961): 137-39, 621a

A caption (such as “entry”) can provide a visual clue that helps the user more easily distinguish the citation form from the citation number:

Jumonville, F.M. Bibliography of New Orleans imprints, 1764-1864, entry 1852

Hale, J.R. “Newberry Library supplement to the foreign books in M.J.D. Cockle’s A bibliography of English military books up to 1642 and of contemporary foreign works.” In Papers of the Bibliographical Society of America, volume 55 (1961): 137-39, entry 621a

For catalogers working in MARC, the 510 $c code provides that helpful visual cue of course, but most people don’t see that.

Others may remember more about the arguments that were made.

[This is not an official communication of the Library of Congress].​

Manon

--
Manon Théroux
Cataloging Policy Specialist
Policy, Training, and Cooperative Programs Division
Library of Congress

-------------------------------------------------

From: Robert Maxwell <robert_maxwell at byu.edu<mailto:robert_maxwell at byu.edu>>
Date: February 24, 2022 at 6:12:10 PM EST
To: DCRM Users' Group <dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu<mailto:dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu>>
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] spotting a preface before subfield c in 510s
Reply-To: DCRM Users' Group <dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu<mailto:dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu>>


I have also noticed (and been irritated by) this, and until Randy pointed it out, I admit, I hadn’t seen the “entry” guidance buried far down in the instructions. It wouldn’t have occurred to me to add a caption not justified by the source.

What purpose could artificially adding the word “entry” possibly have?

The guidance says:

“Include the term “entry” before the entry number only if needed or desired for clarity. Another term may be used if it seems more appropriate to the resource in question. A number standing alone is understood to indicate an entry.”

This reads to me as though the use of the term, far from being required, is only reluctantly allowed (only if needed for clarity). I can hardly imagine a case where it is needed for clarity, especially given “A number standing alone is understood to indicate an entry.”

The first example after this statement is
Evans, C. American bibliography, entry 2046

Why is this thought to be clearer than
Evans, C. American bibliography, 2046

 ?

The “if needed or desired” clause guarantees inconsistency in recording these citation numbers.

Speaking from the point of view of the person who maintains these in BYU’s catalog, the addition of a caption that didn’t come from the source messes up our browse (numerical order) listing of the entries in our Citation index.

 I think we shouldn’t be adding captions to citation numbers not supported by the source, and I think the “entry” paragraph should be removed from the document.

Bob



Robert L. Maxwell
Ancient Languages and Special Collections Librarian
6728 Harold B. Lee Library
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
(801)422-5568

-------------------------------------------------

 From: "Deborah J. Leslie" <DJLeslie at folger.edu<mailto:DJLeslie at folger.edu>>
Date: February 24, 2022 at 6:16:13 PM EST
To: rbrandt at library.berkeley.edu<mailto:rbrandt at library.berkeley.edu>, DCRM Users' Group <dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu<mailto:dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu>>
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] spotting a preface before subfield c in 510s
Reply-To: DCRM Users' Group <dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu<mailto:dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu>>


I have a more specific memory of the introduction of the word "entry" in the SCF. It was meant to parallel "page" in the 510$c, which is used for resources without specific entry numbers. Intellectually satisfying, perhaps, but the word "entry" preceding an entry number added to already-long citations without adding any information. It was formally dropped.

To Nina's observation that records containing "entry" in the 510 were coded dcrmb: they are not contradictory. There is nothing in dcrmb that specifies which citation system is to be used.

Considerations around the source coding of individual records (say, dcrmr) and the state of those rules at any given time is only going to become more complex with DCRMR as an integrating resource. This is a good time to be thinking about how to ameliorate those complexities.

______________________________

Deborah J. Leslie, MA, MLS | Senior Cataloger | Folger Shakespeare Library | 201 East Capitol St., SE, Washington, DC 20003 | djleslie at folger.edu<mailto:djleslie at folger.edu> | www.folger.edu<http://www.folger.edu/> | Opinions her own


-------------------------------------------------

From: DCRM-L <dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu<mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu>> On Behalf Of Randal S. BRANDT
Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2022 3:47 PM
To: DCRM Users' Group <dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu<mailto:dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu>>
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] spotting a preface before subfield c in 510s


Hi Nina,

It is an option in the new SCF to use the word "entry". See Working Principles, Numeration, point B: https://rbms.info/scf/working-principles/

I seem to remember that it was either required or strongly encouraged to include that term when SCF first came out. Clearly that stance has been softened since then.

Cheers,

Randy



On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 2:30 PM Schneider, Nina <nschneider at humnet.ucla.edu<mailto:nschneider at humnet.ucla.edu>> wrote:

Hi all,


Recently, I noticed that a few OCLC records coded DCRMB in the 040$e have the word “entry” immediately following the subfield c in the citation/reference note.

So, instead of this:

510 4_ English short title catalogue, ǂc S95920


I’m seeing this:

510 4_ English short title catalogue, ǂc entry S95920


Admittedly, I haven’t been following recent updates with BSC, but I did look at the MARC website at LC and they don’t prescribe the use of the word “entry” and there’s no mention of its use on the RBMS Standard Citation Forms website.


Perhaps this preface is helpful to someone reading the MARC record, but it seems incorrect from a machine-readable point-of-view. Is there a new policy about adding “entry” to subfield c?


Thanks!!



Nina

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20220315/5dbd0fb2/attachment-0001.htm>