search

DACSAdlib / dacaxc

0 stars 0 forks source link

DCRM (G) to BSR-RDA-MAP to RDA workflow #3

Closed DACSAdlib closed 4 years ago

DACSAdlib commented 4 years ago

DCRM (G) to BSR-RDA-MAP to RDA workflow

After working on it for several months now, I agree with Suzanne's suggestion that the 'workflow' should be reversed to mirror the approach to cartographic materials and rare books That is:

DACSAdlib commented 4 years ago

Alternatively, we could just say something along the lines of: For Graphic Materials refer to DCRM (G) - However, do not use square brackets when devising titles, and do not use abbreviations (per RDA section blah)

Suzanne007 commented 4 years ago

Hi Glenn, I don't think I said use RDA as the principal standard. We would use DACS as the principal standard and use DCRM(G) as the secondary reference for when more specific advice. Which is why I'm not happy about the mapping to BSR-RDA. It takes you away from DCRM(G) to RDA, which defeats the purpose of going to DCRM(G) for the more specific advice.

DACSAdlib commented 4 years ago

OK - Misunderstood - I thought you mentioned DCRM using the example of the maps workflow.

I don't think DACS as a principal and DCRM as a secondary will work. There's a clear cut off - being the moment you start describing graphic materials at file/item level, rather than cataloguing an archive/collection or papers.

If the decision has been made to catalogue a collection item at file/item level you need to refer to DCRM/or RDA for titles. This would be true, even if you decide to create a single series record, and only include the titles in a content listing.

I agree the BSR-RDA-MAP is a nightmare - I think, at this point, it should only be used as a guide to direct DQSS positions (i.e. do not use square brackets) and should not be approached as a viable 'at the desk' cataloguing tool.

Suzanne007 commented 4 years ago

True - so essentially does this mean that the change from RAD to DACs does not have any impact on the description of graphic materials, other than minor areas such as we don't want square brackets etc? Is it that simple?

DACSAdlib commented 4 years ago

:) Yes - Thank you for translating for me. In my mind it was always that simple.

DACSAdlib commented 4 years ago

Closing this - See instead 'DCRM (G) workflow discussion' https://github.com/DACSAdlib/DACSAdlib/issues/11