ALCTS - Association of Library Collections & Technical Services

CC:DA/JSC Rep/BECS/2000/3

April 24, 2000

Committee on Cataloging: Description and Access

ALA Representative to the Joint Steering Committee
Report to ALA/ALCTS/CCS/CC:DA

Report on JSC Meeting, 22-24 March 2000



The Joint Steering Committee for the Revision of AACR, chaired by Ann Huthwaite, met in San Diego, California, 22-24 March, 2000. The meeting – which had a substantial agenda – was a very productive one. Since the meeting’s official minutes won’t be forthcoming for a while yet, the following is intended as a brief summary of the meeting’s high points until the official record is available – and to indicate where ALA action is necessary.

NOTE: memo is keyed to JSC meeting agenda.


  1. Agenda [4JSC/A/11/Rev]
    Approved, with move of items 24 and 34 to Executive Session.

  2. Minutes [4JSC/M/292-326]
    Approved as issued.

  3. “Work” in music uniform titles (25.35, etc.) [3JSC/ALA/11, etc.]
    ALA conceded the point made in the BL response (and supported by LC) that the addition of a footnote at 25.35B was not previously agreed to, and withdrew that part of the proposal. The rest of the proposal was approved, with CCC editorial comments (see 3JSC/ALA/11/ALA follow-up/2/CCC response).

  4. Rule revision package
    M. Ghikas distributed the 1999 Amendments Package in hardcopy and machine-readable forms. JSC will review.

  5. More than one series statement (1.6J1, etc.) [4JSC/LC/37, etc.]
    4JSC/LC/37 withdrawn by LC.

  6. Not all parts in a series (1.6K) [4JSC/LC/45, etc.]
    4JSC/LC/45 withdrawn by LC.

  7. Definition of “monographic series” (Appendix D) [4JSC/LC/46, etc.]
    4JSC/LC/46 withdrawn by LC.

  8. Harmonization of AACR2 with ISBD(ER) (with definitions for “Computer disk” and “Computer optical disc” (Appendix D and Index)) [4JSC/ALA/25, etc.; 4JSC/ALA/27, etc. (esp. 4JSC/ALA/27/ALA follow-up/4 and 4JSC/ALA/27/ALA follow-up/4/LC response; 4JSC/CCC/1, etc.]

    NOTE: what follows is keyed to 4JSC/ALA/27/ALA follow-up/4/LC response unless otherwise noted.

    • 9.0A1: LC proposed revision accepted, except in third sentence of second paragraph order of “disk/disc” reversed and “computer” changed to “computerized device”.
    • 9.0B1: LC proposed revision accepted provisionally (pending CC:DA review) with addition of “from the resource itself” to third paragraph from end, as proposed by CCC.
      Action CC:DA: OK to delete third paragraph?
    • 9.0B2:
      • LC proposed revision in 1: accepted.
      • LC proposed revision in 2: accepted.
      • LC proposed revision in 3: deferred pending review by all constituents.
      Action CC:DA: discuss at ALA Annual 2000.
    • 1.4C8: ALA proposed revision in 4JSC/ALA/27/ALA follow-up/4 accepted.
    • 1.4D9: ALA proposed revision in 4JSC/ALA/27/ALA follow-up/4 accepted.
    • 1.4F9: ALA proposed revision in 4JSC/ALA/27/ALA follow-up/4 accepted.
    • 9.2B1:
      • LC proposed revision in 1: deferred until new Appendix is available.
      • LC proposed revision in 2: deferred.
    • 9.2B2: LC proposed revision accepted provisionally (pending CC:DA review).
      Action CC:DA: OK to retain current text and add reference to new Appendix instead?
    • 9.2B3: ALA proposed revision in 4JSC/ALA/27/ALA follow-up/4 accepted, except “the” changed to “an” in first sentence of first paragraph.
    • 9.2B4: ALA proposed revision in 4JSC/ALA/27/ALA follow-up/4: not accepted. LC proposal to remove the rule altogether not accepted. For now, “a file” will be changed to “a resource” only. When the new Appendix is completed, the rule may be removed altogether.
    • 9.2B5: LC proposed revision, with relocation of “only” from before “transcribe” to after it, as proposed by CCC, accepted provisionally (pending BL and CC:DA review).
      Action CC:DA: OK?
    • 9.2B7:
      • LC proposed revision in 1: deferred pending outcome of 9.2B5 review.
      • LC proposed revision in 2: accepted.
    • 9.3 - 9.3B1: LC proposed revision deferred pending review by all constituents.
      Action CC:DA: discuss at ALA Annual 2000.
    • 9.4B2: LC proposed revision deferred pending review by all constituents.
      Action CC:DA: discuss at ALA Annual 2000.
    • 9.4D1: LC proposed revision accepted.
    • 9.4F1: LC proposed revision accepted.
    • 9.4F4: LC proposed revision accepted. LA/BL will check other chapters for necessity for similar changes in other chapters
    • 9.5B1: LC proposed revision deferred pending review by all constituents.
      Action CC:DA: discuss at ALA Annual 2000.
    • 9.5B3: ALA proposed revision in 4JSC/ALA/27/ALA follow-up/4: not accepted.
    • 9.5C: LC proposed revision accepted.
    • 9.5D1:
      • LC proposed revision in 1: accepted.
      • LC proposed revision in 2: accepted with change of “to the next whole centimetre up” to “rounded up as appropriate” in (e), as proposed by CCC.
      • LC suggestion that JSC poll constituencies in re: Area 5 for Remote Access Resources: accepted.
      Action CC:DA: discuss at ALA Annual 2000.
    • 9.5D2: CCC proposed revision in 4JSC/ALA/27/ALA follow-up/4/CCC response: accepted.
    • 9.7B1:
      • LC proposed revision in 1: accepted.
      • LC proposed revision in 2: accepted.
      • LC proposed revision in 3: accepted.
      • LC proposed revision in 4: accepted.
      • BL proposed revision in 4JSC/ALA/27/ALA follow-up/4/BL response: accepted.
      • CCC proposed revision in 4JSC/ALA/27/ALA follow-up/4/CCC response and 4JSC/CCC/1: accepted.
    • 9.7B2: ALA proposed revision in 4JSC/ALA/27/ALA follow-up/4 accepted.
    • 9.7B4: ALA proposed revision in 4JSC/ALA/27/ALA follow-up/4 accepted, with addition of ":" following “to” in fourth example, as proposed by CCC.
    • 9.7B5:
      • ALA proposed revision in 4JSC/ALA/27/ALA follow-up/4/ALA response: accepted, but CCC to supply different title to illustrate example.
      • BL proposed revision in 4JSC/ALA/27/ALA follow-up/4/BL response: accepted.
    • 9.7B6: ALA proposed revision in 4JSC/ALA/27/ALA follow-up/4: accepted.
    • 9.7B7:
      • LC proposed revision of “file” to “resource” in last example: accepted.
      • LC proposed deletion of reference to 9.2B4: not accepted.
    • 9.7B8: LC proposed revision deferred pending review by all constituents.
      Action CC:DA: discuss at ALA Annual 2000.
    • 9.7B9: ALA proposed revision in 4JSC/ALA/27/ALA follow-up/4: not accepted. JSC recommends not adding the “Made available …” example.
    • 9.7B11: ALA proposed revision in 4JSC/ALA/27/ALA follow-up/4: accepted.
    • 9.7B16: LC proposed revision: accepted.
    • 9.7B17: ALA proposed revision in 4JSC/ALA/27/ALA follow-up/4: accepted.
    • 9.7B20: BL proposed revision in 4JSC/ALA/27/ALA follow-up/4/BL response: accepted.
    • 9.7B22:
      • LC proposed revision accepted provisionally (pending CC:DA review).
        Action CC:DA: OK?
      • CCC proposed revision in 4JSC/ALA/27/ALA follow-up/4/CCC response: not accepted.
    • “Container”: LC proposed revised definition accepted.
    • “Direct access (Electronic resources)”: LC proposed revised definition not accepted. ALA proposed definition in 4JSC/ALA/27/ALA follow-up/4 accepted with order of “disks/discs” reversed, “computer” changed to “computerized device,” and “by the user” deleted.
    • “Disk”/“Optical disc”: deferred pending review by all constituents of definitions proposed in 4JSC/ALA/27/ALA follow-up/4/ALA response and of whether footnote 4 at rule 9.5B1 should remain. There was general JSC agreement that Glossary definitions for the terms are desirable.
      Action CC:DA: discuss at ALA Annual 2000.
    • “Edition: Electronic resources”: ALA proposed revised definition in 4JSC/ALA/27/ALA follow-up/4: accepted.
    • “Electronic resource”: LC proposed revised definition accepted modified as follows:
      Material (data and/or program(s)) encoded for manipulation by a computerized device. This material may require the use of a peripheral directly connected to a computerized device (e.g., CD drive) or a connection to a computer network (e.g., the Internet). See also File (Electronic resources).
    • “File (Electronic resources)”: LC proposed revised definition accepted.
    • "File name (Electronic resources)”: ALA proposed definition in 4JSC/ALA/27/ALA follow-up/4: not accepted. LC proposed revised definition not accepted. JSC: delete from Glossary altogether.
    • “Hard disk”/“Floppy disk”: ALA proposal to add references not accepted.
    • “Interactive multimedia (Electronic resources)”: LC proposal to not add definition to Glossary provisionally accepted (pending CC:DA review).
      Action CC:DA: OK?
    • “Metadata”: JSC proposal to not add definition upheld.
    • “Peripheral (Electronic resources)”: JSC proposal to not add definition upheld.
    • “Remote access (Electronic resources)”: ALA proposed revised definition in 4JSC/ALA/27/ALA follow-up/4: accepted, except second sentence deleted.
    • “TEI header”: JSC proposal to not add definition upheld.

    NOTE: what follows is keyed to 4JSC/ALA/27/ALA follow-up/4/LC response Appendix unless otherwise noted. 4JSC/ALA/27/ALA follow-up/4/LC response Appendix is “intended to clarify the LC position on the status of changes identified in 4JSC/ALA/27/ALA follow-up/2.” Much of …/ALA follow-up/4/LC response Appendix affirms either …/ALA follow-up/2 or …/ALA follow-up/4/LC response. I pull out below only those items that do not do one or the other or those items proposed by LC but not endorsed by JSC.

    • I.A.5, “Multipart file”: LC proposal to remove definition from Glossary (rather than revise it, as ALA proposed) accepted.
    • I.G.25, 9.7B10: ALA proposed revision in …/ALA follow-up/2 deferred pending constituent Area 5 discussion.
    • I.G.30, 9.8B1: LC proposed revision accepted.
    • I.H.1, 11.7B20: LC proposed revision accepted.
    • I.I.1, 12.7B16: LC proposed revision accepted except “resource” changed to “journal” per the pending Chapter 12 revisions.
    • II.B.4, 9.1B3: JSC endorsed proposal to withdraw proposed revision.
    • II.B.5, 9.1C2: JSC endorsed the following revision based on text proposed in 4JSC/ALA/27/BL response:
      9.1C2. If an electronic resource contains parts falling into two or more categories and none of these is the predominant component, give either multimedia or kit as the designation (see 1.1C1 and 1.10C1).
    • II.B.10, 9.5E1: ALA proposed revision of examples in …/ALA follow-up/2: not accepted. CCC proposed revision of sixth example only in 4JSC/CCC/1 accepted except JSC recommends deleting the note at that example as well.

    Using the current AACR2 text as a base, the National Library of Canada (thank you, thank you, thank you!) will now use 4JSC/ALA/27/ALA follow-up/2, 4JSC/ALA/27/ALA follow-up/4, and the responses to 4JSC/ALA/27/ALA follow-up/4 to create a clean copy of Chapter 9.

  9. Works that report the collective activity of a conference, etc. 21.1B2(d)) [4JSC/ALA/28]
    Reaction to the ALA proposal was mixed. ACOC and BL supported it; LA did not; CCC and LC suggested that only “prominently” and “(see 0.8)” be deleted from 21.1B2d.
    Action CC:DA: CCC/LC proposal OK?

  10. Entry under corporate body (21.1B1) [4JSC/ALA/29]
    Only ACOC supported the ALA proposal; BL, CCC, LA, and LC did not. BECS recommends that it be withdrawn.
    Action CC:DA: OK?

  11. Initial articles (22.11D, 24.5A, 25.2C, 26.1A, Appendix X) [4JSC/LC/29]
    The Appendix X document will be reissued by the end of May 2000 by LC and OCLC’s Glenn Patton.

  12. Titles of nobility or terms of honour (22.1C) [4JSC/BL/1/Rev.]
    BL has revised the …/BL/1 document. Constituent responses needed.
    Action CC:DA: discuss at ALA Annual 2000.

  13. Members of royal houses entered under surname, etc. (22.5F1) [4JSC/BL/2/BL follow-up]
    4JSC/BL/2 withdrawn by BL.

  14. Titles of nobility and British terms of honour (22.12) [4JSC/BL/3/Rev.]
    BL has revised the …/BL/3 document. Constituent responses needed.
    Action CC:DA: discuss at ALA Annual 2000.

  15. Additions to names entered under given name, etc. (22.16) [4JSC/BL/4/BL follow-up]
    Reaction to …/BL/4 was mixed. ACOC supported it; ALA also supported it, although we took issue with the form in which the proposed example should be added; CCC, LA, and LC did not support it-or recommended deferring consideration. BL continues to advocate for the proposed revision, although now with a slightly different argument.
    Action CC:DA: discuss at ALA Annual 2000.

  16. Names of persons, See references (26.2A) [4JSC/BL/5/BL follow-up]
    BL has proposed additional revisions to those proposed in …/BL/5. Constituent responses needed.
    Action CC:DA: discuss at ALA Annual 2000.

  17. Terms of address of married women (22.15B1) [4JSC/BL/6/BL follow-up]
    BL has proposed additional revisions to those proposed in …/BL/6. Constituent responses needed.
    Action CC:DA: discuss at ALA Annual 2000.

  18. Revision of 1.4C3 (Place of publications, distribution, etc.) [4JSC/CCC/2]
    Not supported by JSC. Withdrawn by CCC.

  19. Definition of “Main entry” in AACR glossary [4JSC/CCC/3]
    4JSC/CCC/2 considered premature by JSC. Withdrawn by CCC.

  20. Subordinate conference headings (24.7, etc.) [4JSC/CCC/4]
    Reaction to the proposed revision was mixed. ALA and LC supported it. ACOC, BL, and LA thought it unnecessary but didn’t oppose it. JSC endorsed it and it will be included in the next revision package.

  21. The Logical Structure of the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules (LS) (and demonstration of AACR2, Part I re-reorganization prototype)
    • LS Part 1, Rec. 1:
      The prototype reorganization indicates that the parallel structure of the code has been observed fairly rigorously throughout, with some notable exceptions. It is highly debatable where some rules should be reorganized to. There are some instances in which multiple rules in a chapter reference the same rule in Chapter 1. It is clear that changes made to AACR2 will have a ripple effect on other, related documents. AACR2e, and its searching template in Catalogers Desktop (at least), might actually achieve the same end as actually reorganizing the code. The “problem” is that to be maximally useful the search should be concept-predicated, not just word-predicated. Another approach might be to move more rules out of Chapters 2-12 into Chapter 1 as a means of “generalizing” the code.
      The JSC concluded that this first prototypical attempt to reorganize code according to ISBD areas has confirmed tha t such an effort will be as complicated as we’d thought it would. The “alpha” prototype indicates that “consolidating” many rules into Chapter 1 might be a useful interim way to proceed while we consider whether to proceed to a “beta” prototype. The “alpha” prototype will be available for community comment via the JSC Web site (perhaps with a link to the CDS Web site), assuming ALA Editions has no objections.
    • LS Part 1, Rec. 2: work is proceeding on Chapter 9, 0.24, the Principles, and the alpha prototype. Those carrying out this work will keep the LS model in mind when doing so.
    • LS Part 1, Rec. 3: constituencies will refer to the LS document discussion when considering whether remote electronic resources are published or not.
    • LS Part 1, Rec. 4: the seriality/Chapter 12 review is underway.
    • LS Part 1, Rec. 5: the CC:DA Task Force, chaired by Kristin Lindlan, is advised to take the LS document discussion into account in preparing the proposed “major/minor changes” Appendix to the code. Action CC:DA.
    • LS Part 2, Recs. 1, 3, 4, and 7: these are related to the Principles discussion. JSC agreed to defer to Sept. 2000 when Barbara Tillett’s Principles draft will be ready.
    • LS Part 2, Recs. 2 and 5: ACOC will draft a proposal to augment the “Rule of 3” to, optimally, allow the cataloging agency to determine what access points should be added and what form those access points should take.
    • LS Part 2, Rec. 6: JSC agreed to defer to 2001 when the ISBD(S) Working Group Report is expected.

  1. AACR Web site
    The site draft, prepared by John Attig, was discussed and revised by JSC. JSC will have one last look at it after Attig has revised it per the JSC discussion, following which Attig will push the text to Marg Stewart as a replacement for what’s currently running on the NLC server.

  1. [and 41.1.] Revising AACR2 to Accommodate Seriality/ISBD(S) Working Group Report
    • Constituent review is needed of 4JSC/Chair/68/Chair follow-up/2. That review should be particularly mindful of:
      1. the degree to which specific proposals agree with the recommendations endorsed by JSC.
      2. the degree to which Chapter 9 references are accurate.
      Action CC:DA: discuss at ALA Annual 2000.
    • LA/BL is working on a new Introduction Chapter; CC:DA is working on a new “Minor/Major Change” Appendix.
    • The ISBD(S) Working Group document will be distributed to constituents as 4JSC/Chair/68/Chair follow-up/3.

  2. Recommendations concerning revision of rule 0.24 [4JSC/ALA/30, etc.]
    • Recommendation 1: there was general agreement that revising 0.24 iteratively makes sense and specific agreement that the first such revision should be an amended version of that proposed in 4JSC/ALA/30/Chair follow-up, as follows:
      0.24. It is important to bring out all aspects of the item being described, including its content, its carrier, its type of publication, its bibliographic relationships, and whether it is published or unpublished. In any given area of the description, all relevant aspects should be described. As a rule of thumb, the cataloguer should follow the more specific rules applying to the item being catalogued, whenever they differ from the general rules.
    • Recommendation 2: none of the constituents support Option C as written (including ALA), although all agree that tackling the problem is long overdue. The JSC agreed to establish a Working Group to pursue the matter, as proposed in 4JSC/ALA/30/Chair follow-up/Aus response and 4JSC/ALA/30/Chair follow-up/ALA response. The list proposed by ALA of constituent groups which should be represented on the Working Group was endorsed by JSC. Besides a Chair, it was agreed that the Group would need clear terms of reference and a calendar. Brian Schottlaender agreed to draft the terms of reference. Action BECS.
    • Recommendation 3: LA/BL is working on the new Introduction.

  1. Abbreviations (Appendix B.5) [4JSC/LC/47]
    All constituents need to review.
    Action CC:DA: discuss at ALA Annual 2000.

  1. Publisher statement repeating data from title etc. area (1.4D4) [4JSC/LA/1]
    All constituents need to review.
    Action CC:DA: discuss at ALA Annual 2000.

  1. Mission statement for JSC
    Statement in 4JSC/Chair/66/Rev not yet considered by COP (which is being reconstituted, as 3 of the 6 constituent bodies have had CEO changes).

  1. JSC archives
    The University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign (UIUC ) already has some JSC archival materials and is contractually defined as the JSC Archive. Marg Stewart will send 3JSC documents to UIUC.

  2. Principles of AACR2
    B. Tillett will have a draft to JSC by September 2000.

  1. 1999 report to the Committee of Principals [4JSC/Chair/69]
    . . .

  1. Schedule for revision of AACR2
    Tabled pending agenda item 34.

  1. [41.2] Bicentennial LC Conference on Metadata, etc.
    Huthwaite, Schottlaender, and Tillett have been invited to participate.

  1. Rule revision proposals for cartographic materials (Chapter 3, etc.) [4JSC/ALA/31]
    The Anglo-American Committee on the Cataloging of Cartographic Materials – with representatives from the US, UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand – have been working on revising the Cartographic Cataloging Manual since the early 1990s. That work has led to their realizing that the rules themselves are in need of revision. The document that went to CC:DA in January 2000 is the first pass at revising the rules. A new version of that document, revised per the CC:DA Midwinter discussion, has been distributed to JSC as 4JSC/ALA/31. There will be additional revision proposals forthcoming, but very few. The major features of the packet include proposed revisions to the rules for GMD, SMD, “scale,” “other physical details,” and “title chosen,” plus proposals in re: metadata for e-resources.

  1. [and 35.] JSC program of work and Schedule for revision of AACR2
    See attached table

  1. Next meetings
    • September 13-15, 2000: London
    • April 2-4, 2001: Washington D.C.
    • September 12-14, 2001: Ottawa (tent.)

  1. [41.3] Outstanding items from October 1999 meeting
    • JSC Document List: Marg Stewart will prepare by September 2000.
    • Translation uniform titles: Barbara Tillett will address in 2001.

  1. Updates to AACR2
    JSC decided that henceforth RRP reviews will be carried out by national library constituent JSC members. Thus, review of RRP 1999 will be carried out by BL, LC, and NLC by April 1 2000.

  1. Revised statement of policy and procedures for JSC [4JSC/Policy/4]
    General Executive Session discussion.

  1. The Concise AACR2
    While the JSC-requested corrections were made during the last revision, JSC wishes to convey to COP that if it is the intent of the publishers to continue the publication as part of the “AACR family,” JSC needs to review proposed revisions of it before it goes to the publishers.

  2. Internationalization of AACR2
    Ann Huthwaite has drafted a document for COP’s consideration.

  3. Slovenian Translation of Concise AACR2
    The translation is going forward.

  4. Study on GMDs
    The JSC has decided to pursue the GMD set of issues internally, rather than commissioning an external report. Barbara Tillett will take the lead.

  1. Method of Work
    It was reaffirmed that Brian Schottlaender would draft the Terms of Reference for the planned JSC Working Group on Format Variations, and that JSC as group, and the extent possible, electronically, would assemble names of potential members (including the Chair) and discuss the Group’s timeline.
    Action BECS.
    Action CC:DA: Interest?

Submitted by Brian E.C. Schottlaender
ALA Representative to the Joint Steering Committee