21.01.2015 Views

Joint Steering Committee for Revision of AACR

Joint Steering Committee for Revision of AACR

Joint Steering Committee for Revision of AACR

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Term<br />

statement <strong>of</strong><br />

responsibility<br />

Parallel title<br />

Part<br />

Definition (draft <strong>AACR</strong>3 where given, or<br />

<strong>AACR</strong>2)<br />

The title proper in another language<br />

and/or script.<br />

1. One <strong>of</strong> the units into which a resource<br />

has been divided by the publisher,<br />

manufacturer, etc. It is distinguished from<br />

a fascicle by being a <strong>for</strong>mal constituent<br />

unit rather than a temporary division <strong>of</strong> a<br />

resource. 2. As used in the technical<br />

description area, one <strong>of</strong> two or more<br />

physical units intended to be bound<br />

several to a volume. See also Fascicle,<br />

Issue (2), Part (Music).<br />

Comments<br />

In<br />

<strong>AACR</strong>2<br />

5JSC/Chair/11<br />

18 September 2006<br />

Table 1 - 43<br />

In draft<br />

<strong>AACR</strong>3<br />

TEXT √ √<br />

ALA: Some ALA members expressed<br />

confusion with the phrase “one <strong>of</strong> two<br />

or more physical units” in definition 2.<br />

We suggest that “<strong>for</strong>mal constituent<br />

unit” isn’t the right term to distinguish<br />

fascicles from parts. Even the<br />

distinction between temporary and<br />

permanent divisions <strong>of</strong> the resource<br />

won’t always be clear. Both parts<br />

and fascicles may be numbered, and<br />

both parts and fascicles may later be<br />

bound together into volumes. A<br />

fascicle may be considered just a<br />

special kind <strong>of</strong> part, the main<br />

distinction being that the publisher or<br />

distributor calls it a fascicle!<br />

ALA is concerned that the Glossary (in<br />

definition 2) is attempting to go down<br />

the road <strong>of</strong> individual library binding<br />

policies. Some libraries may bind<br />

these individually <strong>for</strong> some specific<br />

reason, while others will bind several<br />

together.<br />

“Constituent” is not defined in the<br />

Glossary, but “component” is. Is there<br />

a reason “component” does not work<br />

here (e.g., “… <strong>for</strong>mal component<br />

unit”<br />

LC: Add definition<br />

Required in<br />

Glossary<br />

√ √ YES

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!