From email discussion when implementing BSC review edits in Chapter 6:
Note on… and Details of… elements
There’s variation in how the General rule is constructed.
6.215.421.1: Make a note on details of extent that are not already included in Extent of manifestation if considered important (see 6.21.4245.1).
6.225.3.1: Give fuller details of illustrative content if considered important.
6.235.3.1: Make a note on details of color content if considered important (see Color content, 6.23).
6.245.3.1: Make notes on the dimensions of a manifestation if considered important.
6.255.3.1: Record details of base material if considered important (see Base material, 6.25.3.3).
6.265.3.1: Record details of applied material if considered important (see Applied material, 6.26.3.5).
6.275.3.1: Record fuller details of the production method if considered important (see Production method, e 6.27.3.4).
6.285.3.1: Record Details of layout if considered important (see Layout, 6.28.3.2).
6.295.3.1: Record Details of bibliographic format if considered important (see Bibliographic format, 6.29.3.3). For instructions on recording Bibliographic format as part of a statement of full collation, see Note on extent of manifestation, 6.215.44.9.
6.315.3.1: Record Details of font size if considered important (see Font size, 6.31.3.2).
It feels like these should be more consistent.
The instruction – is it:
Record Details of element if considered important (see Element, x.x.x.x).
Record details of Element if considered important (see x.x.x.x).
Record details of information if considered important (see Element, x.x.x.x).
The reference link is variously done:
No link
(Element name, x.x) -- Links to element page, but not a specific citation
(Element name, x.x.x.x)
Note: This issue was originally posted by @rarebkcat on 26 September 2021 as a comment on issue #36, which was created as a catch-all for issues related to future development. For ease of tracking, the comments have been moved to their own individual issues and tagged as "future work."
From email discussion when implementing BSC review edits in Chapter 6:
Note on… and Details of… elements
There’s variation in how the General rule is constructed.
6.215.421.1: Make a note on details of extent that are not already included in Extent of manifestation if considered important (see 6.21.4245.1).
6.225.3.1: Give fuller details of illustrative content if considered important.
6.235.3.1: Make a note on details of color content if considered important (see Color content, 6.23).
6.245.3.1: Make notes on the dimensions of a manifestation if considered important.
6.255.3.1: Record details of base material if considered important (see Base material, 6.25.3.3).
6.265.3.1: Record details of applied material if considered important (see Applied material, 6.26.3.5).
6.275.3.1: Record fuller details of the production method if considered important (see Production method, e 6.27.3.4).
6.285.3.1: Record Details of layout if considered important (see Layout, 6.28.3.2).
6.295.3.1: Record Details of bibliographic format if considered important (see Bibliographic format, 6.29.3.3). For instructions on recording Bibliographic format as part of a statement of full collation, see Note on extent of manifestation, 6.215.44.9.
6.315.3.1: Record Details of font size if considered important (see Font size, 6.31.3.2).
It feels like these should be more consistent.
The instruction – is it:
Record Details of element if considered important (see Element, x.x.x.x). Record details of Element if considered important (see x.x.x.x). Record details of information if considered important (see Element, x.x.x.x). The reference link is variously done:
No link (Element name, x.x) -- Links to element page, but not a specific citation (Element name, x.x.x.x)
Note: This issue was originally posted by @rarebkcat on 26 September 2021 as a comment on issue #36, which was created as a catch-all for issues related to future development. For ease of tracking, the comments have been moved to their own individual issues and tagged as "future work."