Gene Fieg said:
>Not to include certain fields, whether variable or fixed, does a disservice
>to the patron who might be looking for specific types of information in
>those books.
Some standards should be considered as very low floors, not ceilings,
for what we should be doing.
Omission of fields, in addition to the too general SMD "online
resource" (the "S" does stand for specific), is my problem with the
PCC provider neutral (PN) electronic record standard. Among fields
omitted are 010$z, 506, and 530.
While it is good to describe the item on screen (as opposed to the
print original as the LCRI would have us do), the PN standard ignores
aggrigator enhancements, differences such as presence or absence of
illustrations, illustrations in col. or b&w, etc.
It remains to be seen what adjustments will be make to the PCC PN
standard if/when RDA is implemented. At least I hope they will adopt
the RDA exact unit name option, rather than repeating a 338 general
term in 300. (An online resource might be a website or streaming
video, as well as an e-book.) RDA does mention "digital file" as a
possible unit name.
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__________________________________________________________
