| 
View
 

Meetings

Page history last edited by Deborah J. Leslie 10 years, 9 months ago

Table of contents:


 


2014-04-22: Title information

  1. Discussion topic: Title information preceding the chief title: discussed and resolved
  2. Review status and finalize outstanding discussion topics
    1. Discussion topic: Manuscript Bracketing: tweaked wording and resolved 
    2. Discussion topic: Manuscripts across DCRM: retired this topic in favor of narrower discussion topics pertaining to mss across DCRM
  3. Confirmed that use of the edition area for manuscripts had been discussed at the public hearing, but has not been resolved
  4. Discussed ways of making the work of this committee more efficient / less burdensome, including
    1. Present discussion topics as proposals and hold online votes
    2. Hold meetings only when we need to hash something out
    3. Read discussions and make comments in advance
    4. Discuss by editing the wiki page instead of adding to the comments section
    5. Schedule videoconferences for 4 p.m. ET
  5. Next steps
    1. Everyone to look over the chart comparing manuscript treatment by Friday April 25, writing in concise justifications for diversions in practice 
    2. Randy will write discussion topic for Area 5, which we will try to dispense with by vote instead of meeting 
    3. Read Manon's email on implementing area 4 addition of "production"


 

2014-04-14: Mss across DCRM | Title information

  1. Discussion topic: Manuscripts across DCRM: Area 4
  2. Discussion topic: Title information preceding the chief title  
  3. Review status and finalize outstanding discussion topics

 

2014-02-28: Dedications | Order and transposition | Title information | Mss across DCRM

 

  1. Discussion topic: Dedications
  2. Discussion topic: Order and transposition (area 0)
  3. Discussion topic: Title information preceding the chief title
  4. Discussion topic: Manuscripts across DCRM: Area 4  

 

2013-10-23: Appendix numbering; Bracketing and Area 2 in Manuscripts

 

  1. Discussion topic: Appendix numbering

  2. Discussion topic: Manuscript Bracketing
  3. Discussion topic: Manuscripts across DCRM

     

2013-09-16: Bracketing and Area 2 in Manuscripts

Present: Deborah J. Leslie, Erin Blake, Elizabeth O'Keefe, and Randal S. Brandt

 

This videomeeting was called at short notice to take advantage of the DCRM(MSS) editorial group's meeting at the Folger. The following points were raised; not all present concurred on each one. Liz will take these points to the DCRM(MSS) (hereafter, MSS) editorial group. On Wednesday, Erin and Deborah will attend their meeting to discuss them.

 

Bracketing

  • The concept of self-describing vs non-self-describing materials is the basis upon which MSS may depart from the principle of transcription. All present concurred. (This is different from non-self-describing material in DCRM(G) (hereafter, G) because it is known that all manuscripts are unpublished; with pictures, you sometimes just can't tell, e.g., a cabinet card photograph of a celebrity could be a one of a handful printed for family members, or one of hundreds printed for sale by the photo studio).
  • Some manuscripts are nevertheless self-describing: those with a formal title. A formal title is transcribed from the resource
  • Although there is a long tradition of certain conventions expected by users and catalogers of manuscripts, a growing movement toward the integration of different formats within catalogs, and pushing the content of our catalogs into the web, dilutes the importance of traditional expectations for manuscripts in the catalog. Increasing numbers of non-traditional users of manuscripts (or graphics or maps or music or books) is an expected, and desired, result   
  • Many graphic materials are also manuscript and/or non-self-describing. Although requiring square brackets in transcription fields for information supplied by the cataloger, G requires that every record indicate the source of the title so as not to assume all users know the convention.
  • There are good arguments for not bracketing devised titles for manuscripts. Nevertheless, some titles will  be transcribed--and assuming expanding, non-traditional user groups of manuscript material-- precision and accuracy about the source of basic descriptive information contributes to a rigor in catalog records that will be appreciated by some in the short-term and may provide essential metadata for the long-term. Requiring a note on the source of the title is a reasonable accommodation, even though it means almost always defaulting to something like "title devised by cataloger."
  • The primary purpose of MSS is to provide rules for item-level cataloging of manuscripts in a library catalog. Creators of finding aids should be free to take whatever guidance they find in MSS that works for individual collections, and ignore what doesn't work. Finding aids will not be coded dcrmmss, so encouraging an unencumbered use of MSS for finding aids or other analytic description of manuscripts in no way impinges on the authority of the dcrmmss source code   
  • Contrary to textual manuscripts, manuscripts of other formats (e.g, maps, music, serials) often are, and would normally be expected to be, self-describing. They will usually have a formal title that should be transcribed. In cases, where there is no formal title, a title devised by the cataloger or taken from a reference source should be bracketed and a source-of-title note should be made. 

 

Area 2

  • There is ambiguity in what constitutes an "edition" in manuscripts: unpublished material can exist in multiples in different versions (e.g. a shooting script and a post-production script for the same film, both issued in multiples) but can also exist in "singles" of different versions (e.g., multiple drafts not intended for sharing)
  • Since manuscripts with formal titles may have formal edition statements  (e.g., "Production draft" on a screenplay), there needs to be accommodation for transcribing formal edition statements in MSS records
  • There is a difference between formal statement on unpublished texts intended to be distributed in multiples (e.g. a screenplay) and statements on unpublished texts that aren't for distribution (e.g. "third draft" on a personal working document). Area 2 is appropriate for the former. 
  • Allowing for an edition area in MSS records opens the spectre of manuscript catalogers thinking they have to provide some kind of edition statement
  • This could be easily taken care of in how the rules for Area 2 are worded. It can be a very short area, and restrict its use to formally-presented edition statements in the resource

 

2013-xx-xx

 

2013-06-20 SORs | DCRM consistency | Silent omissions

 

2013-06-12 DCRM consistency | silent omissions

Call cancelled because of technical problems

 

 

2013-06-03 Appendix C | "Manifestation" | SOR's without collective title

 

2013-02-12: Initial Video meeting 

Comments (3)

Deborah J. Leslie said

at 1:56 pm on Sep 17, 2013

It should always be clear within the record whether text in transcription fields is transcribed or supplied. In the absence of square brackets, a note on the source of the title should be required.

Would it be worth re-thinking how manuscripts with formal titles are to be treated? Right now, there is a hybrid treatment, in that the title is transcribed in the 245, but the 260 is supplied. Right?

Randal Brandt said

at 2:33 pm on Sep 17, 2013

I added the final bullet point under "Bracketing." That was my understanding of how map, music, and serial manuscripts would be treated.

francis.lapka@yale.edu said

at 4:28 pm on Sep 17, 2013

It sounds like the group is nearing a consensus on how to treat titles for non-self-describing materials. It seems logical to extend these ideas to Area 4, too. Even if many manuscripts record nothing more than the date of production (and sometimes place), there remains the same need to specify whether the data is transcribed or supplied. Admittedly, this creates additional burden for notes, where we might frequently need something like "Title, place, and date of production supplied by cataloger."

You don't have permission to comment on this page.