Reclaiming the Past and Reshaping the Future: Revisions to AACR2 Chapters 9 and 12
10/21/2002
NELA Annual Conference
Sturbridge , MA
Ann M. Sandberg-Fox, Ph.D., Cataloging Consultant and Trainer
Jean Hirons (CONSER Coordinator, Library of Congress)
Presented by the New England Technical Services Librarians (NETSL) at the New England Library Association's Annual Conference, Sturbridge, Mass.
Co-sponsored by the North American Serials Interest Group (NASIG).
The 2002 revisions to the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules, 2nd edition (AACR2) include far-reaching conceptual changes, particularly to Chapter 12 (formerly Serials). The compiled revision to AACR2 was published in September 2002, and was implemented by the Library of Congress in December 2002. Therefore, this NETSL/NASIG program, featuring two renowned experts in their respective areas, was most timely.
Ann Sandberg-Fox, Cataloging Consultant & Trainer, discussed "Revisions to AACR2 Chapter 9." This chapter, formerly titled "Computer Files" and now titled "Electronic Resources", is a perpetual work in progress, revised regularly over the past 20 years. Nor does it seem that this chapter will be given even a brief rest to pause for breath: further discussions involving both new and older but unresolved issues will surely result in further revisions in the near future. Ms. Sandberg-Fox proceeded through the chapter by ISBD area, first describing the changes made in each area and then outlining the current discussion points pertinent to that area.
The most significant revision to Chapter 9 has been in terminology: the term "electronic resource" replaces "computer file" throughout AACR2,including the general material designation (GMD). Another important change has taken place in the scope of the chapter (Rule 9.0A): interactive multimedia are now included (although the phrase itself is no longer used as an optional GMD), and a clear distinction is made between direct access and remote access resources. Making a decision as to whether an electronic resource is direct or remote is fundamental, as many other decisions will stem from this. For the former, which are "local" and have physical carriers, conventional terminology, such as CD-ROM, can be used in the physical description area. There is no physical description for remote access resources, such as Web sites. Changes to the rules for the latter include considering all remote resources to be published and mandatory provision of the date on which the resource was viewed for cataloging. Another revision of great importance is the change to Rule 9.0B1, which states that the chief source of information is the entire resource, as compared to the previous emphasis on the title screen. Finally, all of these changes need to be considered in the larger context of the revised Rule 0.24, which now states that the catalog record should bring out all important aspects of a resource - including its content, carrier, form of issuance, bibliographic relationships, etc. - in every area of description.
The requirement to describe all aspects of a complex resource leads to the first of the discussion points outlined by Ms. Sandberg-Fox. The question is, which AACR2chapters should be consulted, in what order, to catalog resources which exhibit characteristics of multiple classes of materials? The ISBD Review Group of IFLA (the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions) has a proposal now being considered which would allow ISBD areas and elements to be repeated as needed, to bring out aspects in the following order: content, physical carrier, form of issuance. She gave the example of a serially-issued map on CD-ROM. Rules for content would be drawn from Chapter 3 (Cartographic Materials), physical carrier from Chapter 9, and form of issuance from Chapter 12 (Continuing Resources). A second discussion point has to do with what the proper scope of the chapter should now be. Many remote-access materials will now be cataloged as integrating resources using chapter 12. Again, the emphasis on bringing out equally all aspects of an item means that the mere fact that a resource may require a computer for its use is no longer the strongest factor determining which chapter to use. The Joint Steering Committee for the Revision of AACR2 (JSC) is considering a proposal which would restrict use of Chapter 9 to something resembling its original scope: that is, for materials such as computer programs, data files, and certain types of multimedia.
The change to "electronic resource" as the GMD for this chapter is associated with the ongoing review of the purpose of function of GMDs in general, again particularly in the case of complex resources. Barbara Tillett and Jean Weihs have conducted recent studies of the GMD, and the IFLA ISBD Review Group is discussing the possibility of constructing complex GMDs from multiple terms when needed.
The value of ISBD Area 3 (now titled "Type and Extent of Resource") for electronic resources has long been in doubt, although at present the area is still in Chapter 9. The current ISBD standard for electronic resources, ISBD(ER), includes an extensive proposed list of terms for Area 3 in an attempt to make Area 3 useful. However, the list was not adopted by the JSC; instead, they have approved the elimination of this area in this chapter. The question at present is where this information should go instead, whether in Area 5, Area 7, or both. This decision, as well as the elimination of area 3, will be finalized in a future package of amendments to the code.
The final discussion points mentioned by Ms. Sandberg-Fox have to do with Area 5. There is debate about the use of conventional terms (such as CD or DVD) for physical description as compared with standardized terms. A recent proposal from the music and moving-image cataloging communities supports the use of standard terms qualified with conventional terms (for example, "2 sound discs (CD)"). Finally, there is ongoing discussion about the value of using Area 5, Physical Description, for remote-access resources whose physicality is of a radically different sort from any other kind of materials. All in all, these discussions serve multiple purposes: to inform the cataloging community of current issues and perspectives, to foster cooperation and response nationally and internationally, to initiate proposals (and counterproposals) for new rules and rule revisions, and most centrally, to keep the cataloging code relevant to the constantly-changing environment in which we operate.
Jean Hirons, CONSER Coordinator at the Library of Congress, and one of the primary architects of AACR2's new approach in Chapter 12, continued the presentation by speaking on "Changes to AACR2 That Accommodate Seriality." Rather than review in detail the extensive changes to this chapter, Ms. Hirons concentrated on two primary topics: the new conceptual framework of finite vs. continuing resources, and the concept of "major and minor changes" as a basis for creating new records. She mentioned, as well, that as a native of Massachusetts, she couldn't resist the opportunity to speak at the NELA conference at the height of autumn, although she is now declining further invitations to speak about Chapter 12!
While the fundamental conceptual change from "Serials" to "Continuing Resources" in Chapter 12 has been discussed at length in many contexts by now, Ms. Hirons' exposition of the basics was most useful. She pointed out the distinction between the new definitions of continuing resources and integrating resources (IRs), and the revised definition of serials. She made clear the differences between monographs and continuing resources, and also between serials and IRs, emphasizing that the latter two terms are not synonymous, but rather designate two types of resources covered by the revised chapter. Finite IRs, such as an image database which is added to until a complete collection is represented, are included in the chapter, because it was judged that only one set of rules was needed to cover all types of IRs. Other types of publications which exhibit qualities of seriality, such as limited-duration conference newsletters and serial reprints, are included as well. The two most essential differences in cataloging treatment between serials and IRs are the basis of the description and change conventions. For serials, description is based on the first or earliest available issue, and changes require the creation of successive entry records. For IRs, the latest iteration (or state of the resource) is the basis of the description, and an "integrating entry" record is updated with new information for most types of changes to the resource.
The significance of these changes has several dimensions. First, we now recognize that many resources, which we have treated as monographs, are in fact not such and require additional control. At the same time, the long-standing monograph/serial dichotomy will not serve us any longer. The umbrella concept of continuing resources may increase in significance over time, as more different types of materials come to exhibit the dynamic quality that we now associate with Web sites. In addition, libraries that participate in either CONSER, BIBCO, or both will catalog integrating resources. Ms. Hirons also addressed several current myths, particularly the perception that "serials" no longer exist in AACR2. Not only has the definition of "serial" not radically changed, but in fact most serials will continue to be cataloged as they have been.
The concept of "major change" or "minor change," which replaces that of "title change" as the basis for creating a new record, is spelled out in rule 21.2A, which now includes provisions that were previously found in Library of Congress Rule Interpretations. The underlying principle behind these new and revised rules is that a new record should be made only when there is a new work. While this ideal goal cannot entirely be achieved, it is worth striving for, and aligns the rules in a more desirable direction. The rules now attempt to distinguish between changes which clearly signal new works (e.g., significant change in content or audience) and those which are more cosmetic in nature (such as title changes due to typography or design). Ms. Hirons described title changes which are considered to be major or minor. Under the revised rules, more change will be considered to be minor, even some that involve the first word in the title. She highlighted four conditions: changes to the representation of a word, such as the switch from an initialism or acronym to the full form; different placements of corporate body names in a title, and their representations; addition, deletion, or change in order of words in a list; and the addition or deletion of generic terms, such as "report", indicating a type of publication.
Finally, Ms. Hirons discussed one of her current efforts, which will be of interest to many. She conducted a survey asking about the desirability of creating a single record for all online versions of an electronic journal, including and especially versions as provided by different aggregators. Ninety-nine percent of those who responded to the survey said that this would be preferred. As a result, she is drafting a proposal for the Program for Cooperative Cataloging, establishing that as a matter of policy, single records will be created which are as "aggreator-neutral" as possible. The only information specific to aggregators in such a record will be 856 fields for electronic access, and 246 fields for variant title access. The journal publisher's web site would be the preferred cataloging source, if possible. CONSER would work with OCLC to collapse existing aggregator-specific records, and clean up the database to the greatest extent. CONSER would also work with the ISSN Center, and vendors like Serials Solutions, to discover journals with online forms which at present have no separate records for those forms, i.e. where existing records are for print manifestations with online information added. The NELA audience received this proposal with great enthusiasm.
Useful links:
1. Jean Hirons's presentation to NASIG 2002 on changes to AACR2;
http://lcweb.loc.gov/acq/conser/aacr2002/A2slides.html
2. Steve Miller's presentation to CONSER/BIBCO on cataloging integrating resources:
http://www.loc.gov/catdir/pcc/bibco/irtrng702_files/frame.htm
Reported by David Miller (NETSL Writer/Editor)
|
