Home
Reading
Searching
Subscribe
Sponsors
Statistics
Posting
Contact
Spam
Lists
Links
About
Hosting
Filtering
Features Download
Marketing
Archives
FAQ
Blog
 
Gmane
From: Myers, John F. <myersj-8eg//VmPVUW4O7BPJtRMKQ <at> public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Petition to support Wojciech's memorandum
Newsgroups: gmane.education.libraries.autocat
Date: Wednesday 3rd November 2010 17:59:50 UTC (over 7 years ago)
I vehemently oppose this line of thinking.  Coding for "Full-level" is
not dependent on compliance with AACR2.  There are multitudes of
pre-AACR records that are legitimately coded as "Full-level": to
intentionally miscode full-level RDA records as "Less than full" is an
abuse of the coding conventions.  

The proposal to create a new RDA value in the Desc bit of the fixed
field was considered but ultimately rejected in light of the
implications such a proposal would hold for all the other descriptive
cataloging conventions around the world.  It was a particularly
short-sighted and Anglo-centric decision years ago to enshrine AACR2 as
the sine plus ultra with its own unique code in the Desc bit, but
hindsight is 20/20 and the changes that illuminate why it is a bad idea
would have been unimaginable when the 'a' code was instituted.  

As of this moment, there is a total of 3115 records coded as RDA in
OCLC.  I see the furor over impediments to workflow raised by the
initiator of the "memorandum" as a lot of overblown noise which feels
like the petulant "Won't!" of a two-year old faced with a plate of
vegetables.

Lastly, what is the point and effectiveness of such a "memorandum" or
its supporting petition?  OCLC does not have the authority to impose its
will over contributing agencies beyond those agencies' willingness to
follow OCLC's guidelines.  The signatories to such a petition have no
authority to impose their will over OCLC.  OCLC does not exist as a
shrine of purity for idolatrous worship of the AACR2 record.

John F. Myers, Catalog Librarian
Schaffer Library, Union College
807 Union St.
Schenectady NY 12308

518-388-6623
[email protected]


-----Original Message-----
J. McRee Elrod wrote:

YES.  Please sign.  In the absence of a fixed field code for RDA,
coding RDA test records as less than full records according to present
standards is a good idea.

--
***********************************************************************

AUTOCAT quoting guide: http://www.cwu.edu/~dcc/Autocat/copyright.html
E-mail AUTOCAT listowners:            
[email protected]
Search AUTOCAT archives:  http://listserv.syr.edu/archives/autocat.html
  By posting messages to AUTOCAT, the author does not cede copyright

***********************************************************************
 
CD: 3ms