|
CC:DA/Chair/2002-2003/2
January 20, 2003
Committee on Cataloging: Description and Access
Chair’s Report on CC:DA Motions
June 2002–January 2003
Also available as an Adobe Acrobat .pdf file
- 4JSC/ALA/46 [Metric unit symbols]
- 4JSC/CCC/8 [Definition of “issue”]
- 4JSC/Chair/76/Chair follow-up/2 [FRBR terminology]
- 4JSC/BL/7 [Capitalisation of single letters]
- 4JSC/BL/8 [Qualification of standard numbers]
- 4JSC/CCC/6 [Rule 6.5B1]
- 4JSC/CCC/7 [Rule 7.5B1]
- 4JSC/LC/53 [Revision of 21.2A2]
- 4JSC/Chair/76/Chair follow-up/2 [FRBR Terminology]
- CC:DA/TF/Chapter 9 Reconceptualization
- 4JSC/LC/54 [Authority control]
- 4JSC/LC/55 [Multipart monographs]
- 4JSC/LC/56 [Multipart monographs – further issues]
- 4JSC/ALA/43/ALA follow-up [Title added entry]
- CC:DA/Chair/2002-2003/1 [Multiple ISBDs]
- 4JSC/ALA/36 [Electronic resources]
- 4JSC/ALA Rep/1 [Revising Chapter 21]
- 4JSC/CILIP-BL/1/Rev [Revised Introductions]
- the timeline for the revised introductions in the JSC Program of Work be modified, in order
- to allow the FRBR terminology revisions to be included in the same revision package,
- to complete missing sections of the Introductions, and
- to allow a more thorough review of the drafts;
- that the timeline be revised to call for full responses by March 23, 2003, for discussion at the April 2003 JSC meeting, with revised introductions to be included in the 2004 revision package;
- that ALA indicate its intention to work on revision of the statement of principles and related issues, encourage LC to draft text dealing with precataloging decisions (based on LCRI 1.0, Chapter 13, and other relevant material), and offer our assistance in that effort; and
- that ALA withhold further comments for a full response to the drafts in March.
- 4JSC/ACOC/1/ACOC follow-up/2 [Rule of 3]
- That CC:DA continue to support JSC option 3 as an option to be pursued in the chapter 21 revision.
- That CC:DA also support at this time some minimal changes following the ACOC proposal that can be implemented immediately.
[CC:DA sees the revision of Chapter 21 as potentially a long process and would not want the gist of the ACOC recommendations to be put off while the revision takes place.] - That CC:DA support the ACOC proposal to revise 1.1F5 rather than use the notes field.
- That CC:DA support the ACOC option language.
- That CC:DA request that JSC consider also the 2 alternative versions offered by the CC:DA Task Force (the first TF version basically clarifies the ACOC language; the second TF version is more explicit about marks of omission and use of et al.)
- Regarding the specific ACOC recommendations for 21.0A1 and 21.30A1, that CC:DA support the proposal language used by the TF in order to clarify the intent of the ACOC proposals.
[With the understanding that the language of the TF’s modification of the ACOC 21.0A1 proposal is: “optionally, make added entries for any other persons, bodies, or works involved that would provide an important access point”] - That the review of Chapter 21 should consider also whether 21.30A1 should address work headings to be consistent with 21.0A1.
- That CC:DA support the TF proposals re addition or modification of examples at 21.6C2 and 21.7B1.
- 4JSC/Chair/76/Chair follow-up/3 [FRBR terminology]
- CC:DA/Chair/2002-2003/3 [Draft revision of ISDB(ER)]
Vote of 5-1 on John’s clarified motion (as seconded by Kate) that CC:DA approve the revised revision proposals contained in the report of the Task Force on ISO Harmonization [CC:DA/TF/ISO/3] and forward the revisions to JSC.
Vote of 6-2 on motion made by John and seconded by Mike that ALA support the LC response to 4/JSC/CCC/8.
Vote of 8-0 on the motion made by John and seconded by Matthew Wise that CC:DA approve the report of the working group on FRBR terminology (with one editorial correction) and forward it to the Joint Steering Committee as the ALA response to 4JSC/Chair/76/Chair follow-up/2.
Vote of 6-0 on the motion made by John (and seconded by Matthew W. and Kate) that CC:DA support 4JSC/BL/7, agree with LC that the rule should cover names as well as titles, and accept the CCC wording of A.30A.
Vote of 6-0 on the motion made by John (and seconded by Kate and Matthew W.) that CC:DA support 4JSC/BL/8, agree with LC that there are ISBD issues that need to be investigated, but agree with ACOC that this proposal should not need to wait until other issues relating to numbers in Areas 7 and 8 are resolved.
Vote of 7-0 on the motion made by John and seconded by Steven that ALA reject 4JSC/CCC/6, for the reasons stated in the MLA response; that we indicate that we have received and are considering an alternative proposal which would use the existing SMDs followed by terms in common usage in parenthesis; and that we prefer that JSC take no action until we have had the opportunity to complete our consideration of this alternative proposal.
Vote of 7-0 on the motion made by John and seconded by Steven that ALA reject 4JSC/CCC/7, for reasons similar to those stated in our response to 4JSC/CCC/6; and that we prefer that JSC take no action until we have had the opportunity to consider an alternative proposal along the same lines as that which we are considering for chapter 6.
Vote of 6-0 on the motion made by John and seconded by Michael that CC:DA endorse the comments of the Committee to Study Serials Cataloging on 4JSC/LC/53 and approve this proposal.
Vote of 7-0 on the motion made by Dorothy and seconded by Steven and Matthew W. that CC:DA support the JSC in directing Pat Riva to use the term “manifestation” generally for “item” in her next draft, in ALA response/2.
Vote of 8-0 on the revised motion made by John and seconded by Dorothy that CC:DA form a Task Force to redefine the scope of Chapter 9 in AACR2 and to propose rules in other chapters to deal with electronic manifestations of materials covered in those chapters; and that we invite the British Library to nominate members to this Task Force.
Vote of 8-0 on the motion made by John and seconded by Dorothy that CC:DA endorse the general directions set out in 4JSC/LC/54, and communicate our collective comments to JSC.
Vote of 6-0 on the motion made by Peter and seconded by John that CC:DA send a summary of its discussion on 4JSC/LC/55 (allowing for some editing of the distillation of ALA comments) to the JSC.
Vote of 6-0 on the motion made by John and seconded by Steven that CC:DA approve a summary of our comments on 4JSC/LC/56 and forward them to JSC, with appropriate editorial revisions.
Vote of 7-0 on the motion made by John and seconded by Mike that we approve CC:DA/Harcourt/1/Follow-up and forward it to JSC. The decisions were: we think a simple statement to make an added entry under the title proper, with a reference back to 21.30J, is adequate and the option does not need to be repeated; the second example in 25.2E1 is no longer valid and should be deleted.
Vote of 8-0 on the motion made by John and seconded by Peter that CC:DA send to the ISBD Review Group a response consisting of the general comments in CC:DA/Multiple ISBDs/2, followed by the specific comments in CC:DA/Multiple ISBDs/1, and incorporating the results of the straw poll on the structure of the GMD.
Vote of 7-0 on John’s motion (seconded by Mike) that CC:DA approve the draft response to 4JSC/ALA/36 and further authorize our JSC representative to make final decisions regarding these proposals based on the positions taken in our response.
Vote of 8-0 on the motion made by Jay and seconded by John that we send our comments as a response to 4JSC/ALA Rep/1.
Vote of 7-0 on the motion made by John and seconded by Mike “that ALA recommend that
Vote of 7-0 on the motion made by Stephen as amended by Dorothy and seconded by Peter:
Vote of 6-0 on the motion made by Mike and seconded by John and Matthew W. that we forward the document CC:DA/FRBR terminology/2 and a summary of our discussion on it to the JSC.
Vote of 8-0 on the motion made by Peter and seconded by Matthew W. that we endorse the report (Comments on the Draft Revision of ISBD(ER)) of the T.F. and include the few comments that have been made by CC:DA into the response.