3 messages, 87 lines:
-----------------------
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 1993 11:33:11 GMT
From: William C Anderson <ANDERSO3@MAIL.LOC.GOV>
Subject: TITLE CHANGES WITH IEEE
In responding to Kathy W.'s query on IEEE conference
publications: I am addressing only OCLC no. 3051116, since my
institution (program) has chosen not to treat the other as a
serial. After reviewing the record it is my personal opinion
that the operating rule is actually 21.2A1, "do not consider a
title proper to have changed if: ... c) the only change is the
addition or deletion of the name of the issuing body (and any
grammatical connection) at the end of the title." All issues
covered by the record, except one, have as the title either:
Proceedings, or; Proceedings of the (date, conference name).
This is not, in my humble opinion, latest entry cataloging or a
loose interpretation of LCRI 21.2C.
William Anderson
CONSER Specialist
LC Serial Record Division
----------------------------
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 1993 08:41:24 -0700
From: Mitch Turitz <turitz@SFSUVAX1.SFSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: IEEE conference proceedings
I agree with Aimee Algier-Baxter's interpretation on what to do with the
IEEE conference proceedings. It is clear that the INTENT of the publisher
is not that the title changes because of a change in the coverage or
content of the material, but more due to the eccentricities of the publisher.
The original AACR2 (not AACR2 revised) was very anal (not analytic) in
insisting that successive entry must be done whenever the title proper has
the slightest variation. Fortunately, with the revised edition of AACR2
this has loosened up a bit so that it is now, more or less, limited to the
first 5 words of the title. There is also a looser interpretation of
fluctuating title, I think, which would allow this situation to work as
Aimee described.
WHEN IN DOUBT, USE COMMON SENSE -- Turitz's Rule Interpretation.
-- Mitch
**********************************************
* Mitch Turitz, Serials Librarian *
* San Francisco State University Library *
* Internet: TURITZ@SFSU.EDU *
**********************************************
DISCLAIMER: The above opinions are mine, mine, all mine!
----------------------------
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 1993 09:06:25 EDT
From: "Enrique E. Gildemeister" <EEGLC@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Subject: Re: Latest entry cataloging?
To Kathleen Wells and fellow Serialists:
IEEE publications have always required very innovative methods to catalog.
There's a GPO title on smoking cessation that has a lot of the same
characteristics; it is OCLC #2241027, ISSN 0098-311X, LC card 75-643179.
I for one am glad that they broke every rule in the book and did something
which makes sense. I get kidded a lot on my job because I quote rules, RI's,
"what they did until 1982, when they switched to .... interpretation, but
only in .... case". Let's face it, you can know the rules inside out, but
ultimately you need to exercise common sense. Every year, the adds clerk
would come to me, "Rick, that book about smoking has *another* title
*again*. Interesting, however, is the fact that the GPO classification
section always treated it as one serial. So I told the adds clerk to go
ahead and put it on the same record with the others but make a local
shelflist note to the effect that we were cheating and that we were to
search it anew when new vols. arrived. Well, the title came to me this
year, bypassing the adds clerk because the title was very different.
I went to OCLC and found, to my amazement, that everything was merged
into one record, much like the IEEE publication. I jumped for joy, because
I was so glad that a national agency had been so innovative and was, in
effect, making a rule interpretation; they had followed common sense. We can
now say that we've seen it done this way by CONSER agencies, talk about it
at committee meetings, debate it, and most delightful/important of all,
DO IT.
Rick Gildemeister
Cataloger
Lehman College of the City University of New York
EEGLC@CUNYVM.BITNET
EEGLC@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
