Meeting Topic: DCRM(G) Launch

Editors in attendance:

• Erin Blake (G)
• Ellen Cordes (G)
• James Eason (G)
• Lenore Rouse (G)
• Helena Zinkham (G)
• John Attig (B)
• Randy Brandt (S)
• Alison Bridger representing Heather Wolfe (Mss)
• Deborah J. Leslie (B)

Time/Date/Location: 

9 AM to 1 PM, July 1, 2008, Anaheim Marriott, rm. 315

Agenda

• Welcome and introductions
• Introduction to DCRM(G) wiki
  • handout: sample wiki pages (since we couldn't project the wiki during the meeting)
  • handout: DCRM(G) Wiki: setting up your account
• Discuss DCRM "objectives and principles" as they relate to graphic materials
  • handout: "Introduction" from Graphic Materials
• Addition to agenda: request from Barbara Tillett: feedback on the IFLA draft Statement of International Cataloguing Principles as they relate to graphic materials (nominally due June 30, but any time this week is okay)
• Identify and begin discussing special aspects of graphic materials description that will require extra thought and attention
• Projected timeline for drafts and future meetings (handout, not uploaded)
• Begin discussion of Area 1, time permitting [Note: time did not permit; we wrapped up ten minutes early rather than make a foray into it]

Notes

• All G editors and the four others present at the meeting will be added to the Wiki as writers; others will be invited to join via DCRM-L
• Dicsussion of III. Objectives and Principles
  • what's the scope? use "rare or special" instead of "rare" (or instead of "original items and historical collections") in first paragraph? (goal: distinguish from mass-produced, commercial graphics more appropriately described by AACR2; "rare and special" are things that  have artifactual value, e.g., wouldn't be weeded). Note that detailed discussion of scope and purpose goes in the Preface.
  • need to decide what the graphics equivalents of "textual variants (edition, issue, impression, and state)" are for first paragraph (and what will be the default for creating a new record, and which will be options, for the manual itself)
  • where rare book cataloging emphasizes "full and accurate," graphics should emphasize guidance on creating "simple and accurate" description (this is more a principle than a goal, though: principle is "rules provide for the inclusion of all elements of bibliographical significance;" appendix would deal with what's minimal)
  • principle that "rules provide for accurate representations of the entity as it describes itself" (III.2.2) implicitly includes non-verbal description, so instead of accuracy "through instructions regarding transcription, transposition, and omission" G needs to acknowledge ambiguity as the norm, and emphasize that "accuracy" thus depends on things like striving for neutral language and minimal interpretation
  • III.2.6 on rules being "compatible with DCRB except in cases where changes are necessary...to conform to the above principles" can be changed to "compatible with Graphic Materials except...." because GM is also based on DCRB and AACR2.
• IFLA draft statement too long to go over as a new agenda item; HZ will draft a brief response and send to dcrmg-list along with a copy of the draft
• Timeline: the draft schedule distributed for discussion was modified
  • based on John Attig's advice: BSC public hearing sooner (maybe even at the Chicago ALA a year from now)
  • plan to meet in DC in November since James will there anyway for The Daguerreian Society symposium November 6-9, 2008
• Special aspects of graphic materials cataloging that will require extra thought and attention
  • pre-cat. decision: how to distinguish what's unique from what isn't (implications for local notes vs. non-local)
  • how to instruct catalogers on what's a local note and what isn't? need to establish general convention early on in the text
  • appendix on collection-level could be substantially expanded b/c is given equal weight in Graphic Materials
  • graphics will have different priorities for copy-specific information than books (e.g. bindings won't figure highly; condition of the image will)
  • graphics generally aren't "self describing" and even when they do have "bibliographic information" there isn't a convention for displaying it in/on the item as with (for example) books, serials, motion pictures.
  • supplied titles will be the norm, not the exception: do not bracket the supplied title, but always give source in a note?
  • supply a statement of responsibility? what is the role of the statement of responsibility?
  • important to distinguish transcribed, supplied, and conjectural data from each other (cf statement of same in Graphic Materials)
  • what's a series? need to make sure it isn't confused with sets, and series-like groups
  • sets (e.g. stereograph views) are analogous to multi-part monographs
  • dealing with born digital pictures
  • keep [graphic] as the GMD? (RDA terminology is "still image")
  • take care to distinguish resource from container in SMD
  • what's part of the item and what isn't? e.g., if you have two mounted photographs with different statements on the mounts, is it the photograph that's being cataloged, or the mount and photograph?
  • note that "copy" and "impression" mean different things in the graphics world from the book world
  • consider including in glossary things that are in AACR2 glossary when there's a strong chance of misinterpretation (e.g., "caption title" as definied in AACR2 isn't what graphics people think of as a caption title)
  • because dates are so often supplied estimates, include appendix with guideance on conjectural dates and how to code them
  • in addition to appendix of MARC examples, would be good to include examples of records in CDWA Lite and other metadata standards used for graphic materials (but those encoding schemes don't follow ISBD, so it will be tricky)

Action Items

• HZ: Write a brief (bulleted list?) response to IFLA draft and circulate to DCRMG-list July 2 (due to Barbara Tillett July 3)
• EB: Update schedule on wiki
• EB: Draft chapter 1 version 1 (work on incrementally; final version due Sept. 2008)
• Everyone: think about what chapter you'd like to work on (NB. those present agreed Joe Springer would be a good one to do the Introduction)