Mr. Schiff:
I rarely look at the PCC website, since its overstuffed with information,
and sometimes annoying to navigate; thank you for the link for future
reference. However, I sent the question around publicly because I was not
sure if this was a hitherto-unknown RDA provision that I was coming across,
instead of a single rogue cataloger. My posting was a request for
information, albeit worded a bit strongly in places. As such, I don't
believe that what I did is extraordinary, or an unusual response to the
circumstances, and I see no need for hush-hush emails.
Deborah Tomaras, NACO Coordinator
Librarian II
Western European Languages Team
New York Public Library
Library Services Center
31-11 Thomson Ave.
Long Island City, N.Y. 11101
(917) 229-9561
dtoma...@nypl.org
Disclaimer: Alas, my ideas are merely my own, and not indicative of New
York Public Library policy.
From: "Adam L. Schiff" <asch...@u.washington.edu>
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Date: 03/02/2011 12:40 PM
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Subjective Judgements in RDA 300s????
Sent by: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
<RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA>
What I do not understand is, since this was a PCC BIBCO record, and since
the BIBCO liaisons are easily found on the PCC website
(http://www.loc.gov/catdir/pcc/bibco/bibcoliaisons.html), why Ms. Tomares
did not simply write in private to the University of Chicago to inquire
about the record. There certainly could not then have been any
accusations of politicizing this and no need for any public drubbing.
Adam Schiff
UW BIBCO Liaison
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Adam L. Schiff
Principal Cataloger
University of Washington Libraries
Box 352900
Seattle, WA 98195-2900
(206) 543-8409
(206) 685-8782 fax
asch...@u.washington.edu
http://faculty.washington.edu/~aschiff
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
On Wed, 2 Mar 2011, Deborah Tomares wrote:
> Everyone:
>
> IMNSHO not all the illustrations were beautiful. And frankly, this is the
> problem that I had with the record--not really whether illustrations were
> listed as colored or not (I tend to note this especially in art books, as
> others have mentioned). The problem is that subjective judgements have
been
> allowed into cataloging, where I don't believe they should exist. Since
> this is an RDA record, and I am not entirely conversant with RDA rules, I
> sent this around to the wider cataloging public, to see if this is
> acceptable practice under the RDA framework. (After I had a good laugh,
and
> then fixed the 300.)
>
> Since Mr. Cronin of University of Chicago has replied to RDA-L about the
> question of whether this is RDA practice, I'll consider it answered: "My
> personal apologies to the cataloging community for what was put in the
300
> field. This has nothing to do with RDA, nor does it reflect CGU's policy
> or philosophy. While NYPL would like to politicize it, this is nothing
> more than a demonstration of extremely poor judgment of a cataloger who,
> frankly, should have known better." I will only state, for the record,
that
> I was not attempting to "politicize" the issue, but rather to get a
handle
> on the new rule-set for cataloging, and discover how far my understanding
> of what goes into a cataloging record has to change. I'm glad to know
that
> subjectivity is not standard RDA practice. I will admit to calling CGU
out
> publicly for their cataloging in this instance, but I would also do it
for
> an AACR2 cataloging agency that had made strange errors in records, if I
> knew with certainty which agency had done the cataloging (i.e., it's
about
> the cataloging, and nothing more).
>
> Thanks to everyone for responses and opinions. It's been interesting
> reading!
>
> Deborah Tomaras, NACO Coordinator
> Librarian II
> Western European Languages Team
> New York Public Library
> Library Services Center
> 31-11 Thomson Ave.
> Long Island City, N.Y. 11101
> (917) 229-9561
> dtoma...@nypl.org
>
> Disclaimer: Alas, my ideas are merely my own, and not indicative of New
> York Public Library policy.
>
