Quoting "J. McRee Elrod" <m...@slc.bc.ca>:
Capitalization as found would be acceptable in 505 contents and 520 summaries, but 245 titles are seen in hitlists with other titles, so uniformity is more important. In the upper case examples I checked, the all caps do not reflect the source, according to Amazon images. There is no rationalization apart from bone laziness in harvesting data.
Contents notes rendered all uppercase have attracted hostile comment already (perhaps not here, but certainly on Autocat), when incorporated into (AACR2) LC records from linked data produced or captured elsewhere. It's widely understood that continuous uppercase text is more difficult for most people to read.
I fail to understand what reasonable purpose can be served in using uppercase. If it's as a paltry attempt to represent the style of the titlepage (or other source of primary identifying data for a document), that purpose would be better served by attaching a link to a titlepage image -- which is a strategy I'm considering for a forthcoming project with early printed books.
In fact, all lowercase would be better for legibility, and just as simple to do.
Hal Cain Melbourne, Australia hec...@dml.vic.edu.au ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
