[Heb-NACO] From Roger re.: PSD, Summary of Decisions, Editorial Meeting 15/06, June 15, 2015 (excerpts)

[Kohn, Roger]

---

FYI,

-       R.


From: Subject Authority Cooperative Program [mailto:SACOLIST at LISTSERV.LOC.GOV] On Behalf Of Policy and Standards Division
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2015 4:35 PM
To: SACOLIST at LISTSERV.LOC.GOV
Subject: [SACOLIST] Summary of Decisions, Editorial Meeting 15/06, June 15, 2015

ACQUISITIONS AND BIBLIOGRAPHIC ACCESS DIRECTORATE
POLICY AND STANDARDS DIVISION

SUMMARY OF DECISIONS, EDITORIAL MEETING NUMBER 6

June 15, 2015


PSD policy specialist responsible for this list:  J. Young


CLASSIFICATION

…

SUBJECT HEADINGS

            Subdivisions to be added to lists of free-floating subdivisions:

                        H 1156, Literatures
                                    $x Palestinian Arab authors


            Announcement

            Justification and research for subject heading proposals
                        The source citations in proposals for new and revised subject headings serve two purposes: to allow for vetting of the proposal itself during the editorial review process, and to provide a permanent reference for consultation.  As SHM H 202 states,

The information recorded in the authority record serves as a record of how the cataloger decided on the terminology selected for the heading and UF references.  In addition, definitions of terms that are not readily available elsewhere, information on the intended scope and usage of the proposed heading, its relationship to, and distinction from, similar existing headings, and any peculiarities or other pertinent information about the heading are recorded here.  This information is used to guide the proposal through the editorial approval process.  The online subject authority record serves as a permanent record for future reference and consultation.

            It is important to include information that supports every aspect of a proposal, including the form of heading and any qualifier, the UFs (unless they are UFs made according to rules and not based on usage, such as an inverted reference), the BTs and RTs, and the scope note. This is typically done by quoting or paraphrasing passages from the work being cataloged, but may take the form of a cataloger-supplied summary of the work. Further, since the language of the vocabulary is English, information (other than the title of foreign-language works) should always be provided in English.
            From the point of view of the editorial process, provision of full information from the work being cataloged and the reference sources consulted allows for much more expeditious review by the policy specialists.  Some LC catalogers have indicated that they choose not to provide full information because they are required to send the book with their proposal; since PSD policy specialists can see the book, the reasoning goes, the “extra” work is not necessary.  This view does not account for the fact that all catalogers, at LC and elsewhere, are strongly encouraged to review the Tentative Lists and provide comments on the proposals.  Few if any catalogers have access to the book or reference sources, so they cannot provide effective review unless the records provide information in English.  The lack of full supporting information is not only a problem with proposals that originate within LC, either. There are just as many SACO proposals submitted without full supporting citations, and since it is quite often the case that no one at LC has access to the works being cataloged, those proposals can be quite difficult to review.
            The authority record is also a permanent record that indicates why the proposal was made, and why it was proposed and approved in the form that it was. Catalogers use the source citations to help them understand what a heading means and how it should be used. They also use the citations to help them know whether they need to propose another heading.  Providing only a title that appears to have little or no relevance to the proposed heading is not helpful in either of these cases.
            It should also be noted that citation of an “LC pattern” in a 952 field is not a substitute for source information provided in the 670 fields. Source citations provide intellectual support for the need for the heading and references, while the LC pattern justifies the form of heading and references (e.g., what the qualifier should be). Providing the pattern Short stories, English, for example, is not enough to support a proposal for Short stories, [language]. The work being cataloged and information from that work must also be submitted.
            The meeting has always marked some incomplete proposals as “resubmit” and sent them back to the proposing cataloger or institution. Formerly, policy specialists would complete some of the proposals themselves, or take certain things on faith and approve them. In the current era of diminished resources and increasing workloads, however, the policy specialists do not have time to complete others’ work for them.  And providing incomplete information for consultation is a disservice to current and future catalogers.
            Going forward, the meeting will return any incomplete proposals for revision. Although this action will constitute extra work on the policy specialists’ part, the hope is that it will be short-term pain for long-term gain: catalogers, once reminded, will submit more complete proposals from the outset. For most proposals, the extra time required will be negligible but will cumulatively save a significant amount of the policy specialists’ time, as well as that of current and future generations of catalogers.
            In a further effort to increase the number of complete proposals, policy specialists will revise SHM H 202 and H 203.  The guidance on source citations will be updated, and examples with full source citations will be included. The revisions will be available later this summer.


            Other decisions:

…
GENRE/FORM TERMS

            Announcement
                        In September 2015 the meeting will approve approximately 40 genre/form terms for religious materials. The proposals appear on Tentative List 1518, which may be accessed at http://classificationweb.net/tentative-subjects/1518.html.  PSD is requesting comments on the proposals; please email Janis L. Young at jayo at loc.gov through August 31, 2015.
            The religion genre/form project is a collaboration of PSD and the American Theological Library Association, which coordinated with the Association of Jewish Libraries, the Catholic Library Association, and the Council on East Asian Libraries.  PSD thanks all those who worked to develop the list of terms, which includes terms pertinent to several religious traditions.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osu.edu/pipermail/heb-naco/attachments/20150624/31c32422/attachment-0001.html>