Karen said:
>the "half" that we are missing in libraries is often the most unique
>elements of our collection...
Both digitalization of unique resources and AARC2/MARC21 records
describing them are giving increased access to such materials in
library collections. What new impetus will new rules or encoding
practices give? It seems to me such extensive retooling would take
resources away from digitalization and preparation of bibliographic
records.
In the meantime, we don't do simple MARC21 and AACR2 upgrades which
would save programming effort, e.g., moving 538 (which everyone agrees
should be an early note) to 301 or 512; getting alternate title out
of title proper, and rationalizing treaty entry; or having consistent
practices such as always transcribing or supplying place of
publication jurisdiction.
As a very poor speller, and a worse keyboarder, I hesitate to criticize
style.
But as I try to read these discussions, I keep being side tracked by
expressions such as "most unique". Something is unique or it isn't.
There are no gradations. I can't get through two paragraphs of RDA,
or discussions about it, without being distracted by language usage.
If we can't use language, how can we expect to accurately describe
information resources?
I do miss Michael Gorman's clear and lucid style.
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__________________________________________________________
