Re: New AACR2 Title Changes and "Utne" Baumli,Vickey 03 Apr 2007 11:28 UTC
Check out the date on this email. I had to chuckle when an email came out yesterday stating that this would be the "last" title change for Utne Reader/Utne. Vickey Baumli Serials Specialist Owens Library Northwest Missouri State University Maryville, MO 64468 660-562-1536 vbaumli@nwmissouri.edu -----Original Message----- From: Regina Reynolds [mailto:rrey@LOC.GOV] Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 8:55 AM To: SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU Subject: Re: New AACR2 Title Changes and "Utne" Chris and all confused serialsts-- Here is the reasoning behind the Utne situation, and why the new record was created and why a new ISSN will be assigned. First and easiest, the record was created before December 1 and the cataloging library did not want to delay cataloging until after December 1. Second, even if the situation had come up on December 2, several of us who discussed this would still have made a new record for the following reasons: "reader" is not a clear-cut case of a word indicating a type of resource. Given this, *and* the fact that the publisher so strongly indicated this was a very conscious and deliberate title change tilted the decision in favor of a new record. Also, since it is very early in our experience with the new rules, it was felt that we should be conservative in applying them so as to not set precedents that we might later want to retract. The rule about words indicating a type of resource was intended to cover those maddening cases where "magazine," "journal," or other common resource words come and go willy-nilly from titles or move around in the titles. This did not seem to such a case. I hope this helps to explain what was done. It is interesting to note that the first words of Rule 21.2A1 are "In general..." thus confirming that there are cases where judgment will be called for. This was such a case. However, as our experience with the new rules grows, some of the cases that are puzzling now will become routine. Some of us remember the crisis that erupted when U.S. News and World Report became U.S. News & World Report (or vice versa). A new record had to be created, then an RI was produced and the record was cancelled. We've come a long way! Regina Reynolds Head, National Serials Data Program Library of Congress On Mon, 9 Dec 2002, Chris Blackman wrote: > There is a relatively new CONSER verified record in OCLC for "Utne", the > new title variation of "Utne Reader". I'm confused by this as it is my > understanding that dropping "Reader" from the title no longer requires a > new record by the AACR2 2002 revision that was instituted on Dec. 1 > (However, the record was created in October and it may have been > verified before Dec. 1). > > I would have thought CONSER would err on the side of not verifying such > a new record. Am I wrong about the new 'new record' requirements? Any > enlightenment? > > Thanks, > > Chris > > Christine Blackman > Catalog Librarian > Williams College Libraries > 55 Sawyer Library Drive. > Williamstown, MA 01267 > (413) 597-4403 > cblackma@williams.edu > Regina R. Reynolds email: rrey@loc.gov Head, National Serials Data Program voice: (202) 707-6379 Library of Congress fax (202) 707-6333 101 Independence Avenue, S.E. ISSN Web page: lcweb.loc.gov/issn/ Washington, D.C. 20540-4160