Romanization

The ALCTS Non-English Access Working Group on Romanization invites comment on its draft report. Recommendations

1. A majority of the Working Group believes that the factors discussed in this report are significant enough to make a general shift to Model B in bibliographic records premature at this point. Some members of the Working Group feel that having romanized access points in records provides enough added value that their use should be continued indefinitely. Others believe that in an environment of shrinking staffs and production pressures we should anticipate future developments in making our decision and recommend a move to Model B sooner rather than later. However, most believe that although a gradual move towards the use of Model B for current cataloging is probable, we should continue current practice for some time longer as we prepare for the transition.
2. Further research is needed into the remaining obstacles so that we can identify decision points that will allow us to move beyond the status quo. We recommend that ALCTS sponsor a survey of libraries and library systems to better understand the status quo and possible future directions from a technical perspective.
3. Automatic transliteration software should be utilized to reduce time needed to create the romanization, when possible.
4. The amount of romanization in records could be reduced by limiting it to fields including key data for access (titles and headings).
5. Since different languages and scripts raise very different issues, some language/script cataloging communities may decide to move to Model B sooner than others. A coordinated decision to change practice within each community would be preferable to individual decisions to implement Model B in different libraries at different times.

LCSH Subdivisions for Cartographic Materials

Changes in map cataloging from LC.

On June 10, 2009 the Policy and Standards Division (PSD) of the Library of Congress requested input from the library community about its proposal to change the structure of LCSH subdivisions for many cartographic materials. In brief, the paper suggested simplifying form subdivisions used for cartographic materials by removing the adjective (e.g. -Maps, Comparative would be revised to -Maps). The new genre/form headings would then do the “heavy lifting” of identifying a particular genre or form of material. After reviewing all of the comments it received, PSD has decided to implement its proposal to simplify the subdivisions.

The full text of the decision, which includes PSD’s responses to several concerns raised by the correspondents, is available on LC’s web site.