__________________________________________________________________
FOR DISCUSSION AT COMMITTEE TO STUDY SERIALS CATALOGING, MIDWINTER
------------------------------------------------------------------

Message 3, continuation of letter to LC, verbatim, with minor changes
---------------------------------------------------------------------

I propose that the LCRI's dealing with selection of qualifiers for uniform
titles be amended as follows. The citation of pages, paragraphs and lines
refer to CSB no. 59 (winter 1993). Text in quotation marks is taken from
the Bulletin; text in angle brackets is proposed.

On p. 12, provision 2: "There is a special problem with the choice place vs.
body, however, and when one is facing this choice <the cataloger should
consider following> the hierarchy indicated both by the order and the wording
of the first two of the provisions below."

Skip to p. 13, provision 4b: "The addition of place as a qualifying term is
inadequate to resolve the conflict, because another work with the same title
was published in the same place." <Use judgment and common sense in all cases,
however. This provision may be appropriate in cases where the relationship
of the corporate body, if there is one associated with the work, is a strong
one (e.g., the publication is the official organ of the body; the body's name
appears prominently; the body is not merely a commercial publisher; or it is
not just a logo devised by the editors, as opposed to a duly constituted body
with a life of its own). Otherwise, use place and date, as in provision 5a,
second example. Apply place/date also in cases where it is known that at some
time in its existence, the serial has lacked an explicit affiliation with a
corporate body (i.e. the serial lacked a publisher or issuing body statement).
If a publication entered with a corporate body qualifier subsequently drops
affiliation with any corporate body or gives only a commercial publisher
statement, revise the record and apply place/date.>

My experience has been that LC and the CONSER libraries have never used a
commercial publisher in a serial uniform title, and that they seem to follow
guidelines similar to most of those proposed here. It would be a great boon
to catalogers to revise and fine-tune this LCRI. A clearer, more detailed
rule interpretation would streamline the decision-making process considerably
in the area of serials cataloging discussed here.
_________________________________
END OF MESSAGE. NO MORE TO FOLLOW
---------------------------------