2 messages, 58 lines:
-----------------------

Date:         Fri, 7 Oct 1994 14:39:54 EDT
From:         "Enrique E. Gildemeister" <EEGLC@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Uniform titles in CONSER Core record
In-Reply-To:  Message of Fri,
              7 Oct 1994 14:08:01 EST from <TURITZ@MERCURY.SFSU.EDU>

Mitch,

I guess my interpretation was different, considering that the records I
found which deviated from the RI 25.5B were formulated to simplify or make
the choice of qualifier a rapid one, using place and date. Some of these
were minimal level records. If the purpose of the core record is to create
something usable while saving the all-out effort of creating a full level
record, that is, improving efficiency and making things simpler to a
certain extent, then I could see that place/date were going to continue
to be used, in disregard of the RI.

My question, then, is, if the idea is to come up with a simpler, more
efficient way of getting serials cataloged and out, and CONSER libraries
are already finding it more efficient to use place/date, isn't it a rea-
sonable question to ask whether such a policy might be used in a Core
record? Again, a Core record will omit certain data that are now prescribed
by AACR2r and the LCRI's as necessary; mightn't it also contain data elements
formulated according to rules/practices that omit certain details?

By the way, Mitch, at least we agree on "enhanceability"! ;-)

Rick Gildemeister
Cataloger/OCLC Enhance Coordinator
Lehman College of the City University of New York

----------------------------
Date:         Fri, 7 Oct 1994 15:44:13 EDT
From:         "Enrique E. Gildemeister" <EEGLC@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Subject:      130 Core P.S.

I looked over the proposed Core CONSER record which specified policies
for names and subjects, but I found nothing about formulation of uniform
titles. My sense is that it was not mentioned because it was not perceived
by the formulators as a problem. Since there is some variation in treatment
of creation of name headings from minimal to Core to full level, it's a good
guess that the uniform title question is open by default,since it is
not mentioned. If policies were drawn up for the other access points, but
not for uniform titles, I suspect it may, again, represent an oversight.

One might be tempted to say that it's not mentioned because all questions
regarding it are assumed to be settled, but the formulators of the Core
guidelines were so thorough and detailed in all other areas, I remain
skeptical that the 130 question was really dealt with.  Part of this
may be due to the fact that a serial 130 (not a series) is not under authority
control, and people felt they needed to focus on the fields that are.

Rick Gildemeister
Cataloger/OCLC Enhance Coordinator
Lehman College of the City University of New York