Uniform Titles in CONSER Core Record (Enrique Gildemeister) Birdie MacLennan 07 Oct 1994 22:21 UTC
2 messages, 58 lines: ----------------------- Date: Fri, 7 Oct 1994 14:39:54 EDT From: "Enrique E. Gildemeister" <EEGLC@CUNYVM.BITNET> Subject: Re: Uniform titles in CONSER Core record In-Reply-To: Message of Fri, 7 Oct 1994 14:08:01 EST from <TURITZ@MERCURY.SFSU.EDU> Mitch, I guess my interpretation was different, considering that the records I found which deviated from the RI 25.5B were formulated to simplify or make the choice of qualifier a rapid one, using place and date. Some of these were minimal level records. If the purpose of the core record is to create something usable while saving the all-out effort of creating a full level record, that is, improving efficiency and making things simpler to a certain extent, then I could see that place/date were going to continue to be used, in disregard of the RI. My question, then, is, if the idea is to come up with a simpler, more efficient way of getting serials cataloged and out, and CONSER libraries are already finding it more efficient to use place/date, isn't it a rea- sonable question to ask whether such a policy might be used in a Core record? Again, a Core record will omit certain data that are now prescribed by AACR2r and the LCRI's as necessary; mightn't it also contain data elements formulated according to rules/practices that omit certain details? By the way, Mitch, at least we agree on "enhanceability"! ;-) Rick Gildemeister Cataloger/OCLC Enhance Coordinator Lehman College of the City University of New York ---------------------------- Date: Fri, 7 Oct 1994 15:44:13 EDT From: "Enrique E. Gildemeister" <EEGLC@CUNYVM.BITNET> Subject: 130 Core P.S. I looked over the proposed Core CONSER record which specified policies for names and subjects, but I found nothing about formulation of uniform titles. My sense is that it was not mentioned because it was not perceived by the formulators as a problem. Since there is some variation in treatment of creation of name headings from minimal to Core to full level, it's a good guess that the uniform title question is open by default,since it is not mentioned. If policies were drawn up for the other access points, but not for uniform titles, I suspect it may, again, represent an oversight. One might be tempted to say that it's not mentioned because all questions regarding it are assumed to be settled, but the formulators of the Core guidelines were so thorough and detailed in all other areas, I remain skeptical that the 130 question was really dealt with. Part of this may be due to the fact that a serial 130 (not a series) is not under authority control, and people felt they needed to focus on the fields that are. Rick Gildemeister Cataloger/OCLC Enhance Coordinator Lehman College of the City University of New York