Re: [ACAT] Inscrutability versus overkill in new authorities

Posting to Autocat

On 09/04/2013 21:44, john g marr wrote:

<snip>
What’s not “uncertain” about an “approximation”?

The dates for Lotto, Lorenzo could be written in rda as “approximately 1480-approximately 1556”.

Cleaner, though, would be to use his “active” period for dates instead of his b.-d. dates.

BUT — has no one noticed that the access point “Lotto, Lorenzo” is unique and thus needs no further qualification?
</snip>

Yet another strange solution without justification, just as “cm” is supposed to be a symbol instead of an abbreviation. As I have mentioned before, this is one of those “Gotchas!” that I used to love to find in records, that make no difference whatsoever for display or retrieval but is a vital distinction to some person, somewhere, although it makes no difference at all to anyone else. http://blog.jweinheimer.net/2011/08/re-spelling-of-cm-in-rda-records-3.html

That is, unless someone can actually demonstrate that it makes a difference to the general populace. But, we know that practical considerations are irrelevant when dealing with RDA. This is one of those “Gotchas!” that results in a lot of useless labor for catalogers.

“Cataloger judgment” is still a strange concept that means different things to different people.

-327

Share