In December, 2009, version 4.2, areas 0 through 8, plus cover sheet, was sent to the Chair of the Bibliographic Standards Committee, who assigned areas to committee members and volunteers for review. Many reviewers went beyond their assingments and commented on the entire document. In all, we received comments from twenty-two reviewers (who will all be thanked in the acknowledgments!). The reviewers have been made anonymous here because documents on this wiki are searchable by Google. Version 5 is being drafted based on these responses, and the discussion they are generating.

Selected encouraging words from reviewers

• Please give my congratulations to the editorial team for superb work! -- Reviewer F
• I don't know much about the technical side of images, but if I had to catalog an image, the document would be of great use. In fact, I'd like to try to use it, so the document excited me about the possibility. -- Reviewer T
• I applaud recording the place of creation for unpublished material. -- Reviewer G
• The concept of the “perfect copy” and emphasis on transcription are welcomed changes from Graphic Materials. -- Reviewer S
• I would like to start out by saying what a great job you are all doing and how excited I am by the prospect of having an update to Betz available, I also know of a number of Harvard librarians who will forever be in your debt! In fact, there is really very little for me to remark upon. -- Reviewer Q
• Overall comment: These rules are great. I’m amazed at how much work your group has done! Congratulations! -- Reviewer R
• You've stated the problems so clearly, and the document you've drafted is so strong, that the need to challenge certain book-based assumptions is now unavoidable. -- Reviewer J

Comments from Reviewers

• All comments, in one document, in rule order (not including comments pointing out simple typos, etc.)
• The same comments, divided into three documents (revised January 10, 2010), as follows:
  • Group 1: comments that seem to point to areas for discussion with the Bibliographic Standards Committee at Midwinter in Boston (document for BSC meeting will be prepared from these)
  • Group 2: comments that seem to point to areas for discussion amongst the editors at Midwinter in Boston (agenda to be prepared from these)
  • Group 3: comments that seem to require no further action, but are noted here for the record. Where indicated, changes based on these comments have been made in Version 5
• Suggested changes to Other Physical Details from Reviewer U (Reviewer U = two people from the Getty Research Library)
• Responses to comments from reviewers