Sunteți pe pagina 1din 3

About Cataloguing in the 20th century

Cataloguing in this century is divided in two, there are:

1st. Is code and standard. Means : Red Books, ISDBS, MARC, and AACR2.
2nd. Is comunicated catalogue records : derived from books / cards – microfiches, online
catalogue, and web based catalogue.
Then, after catalogue have been digitalized, seems that every progress of cataloguing disappeard.
Even actually, what is called as, catalogue is the digitalized data. Digitalizing data is an
important progress, but then how do we will cataloguing an electrical data? By means, we are not
suppose to ignore any progress made by contemporary cataloguing method, archieve on the past
100 years.
Well done by “Charles Amni Cutter” cataloguing being a fascinating product to solve some
problems at the same time.
Cataloguing is an incredible method. But for some people his idea called as irrelevant. And the
other said that will be perfected.
Description of the issue :
Issues in 1901
Starting by CW.Andrew in Illinois University. Andrew’s paper is about : The emerging
coaperative cataloguing system. He make a uniformity of a cataloguing to make the mechanism
of a procedure to be more logic. At 1st, Cutter propose on LC to printed catalogue, and hithetro
put in cataloguing and different from children’s room or information desks. 2 nd The above idea is
gone in the 20th century and retured to a system full of dificulties and discussion. 3 rd Andrew
pointed the he already make a catalogue model presented on ALA Publishing Board Meeting
where Cutter and the other are there. 4th They based on Typography of card printed catalogue and
started that full name will be more important.
Then they change and use the Cutter’s cataloguing for 77 years.
Chaos arise again when the committee confuse to choose one of three ( letter symbols, fold
symbols, and exact size in centimeters ). And reported as, they suppose to find an ideal catalogue
which helpful for the library user not for cataloger.
Cutter and friends will locked old fashioned but at that time they seems better than our electric /
digitalized catalogue of our own today.
Issues in 1908 is a rule that is jump back to 1968 rule. 5 th because the committee still feel dificult
to choose one rule to use, like UK orn USA, etc. then this year is dominated on the case not
condition or principles.
Vatican Code, published in 1931.
6th says as the most complete catalogue. 7th Vatican code is complete ( name, title description,
subject headings, and filling ).
Issues in 1941, Osborn.
In 1941 published ALA cataloguing rules. 8th hit by British with wider matters. But the existence
of the 1941 draft rules is to hold the Australian Librarian, Andrew Osborn. 9th They say that
better to use simpler rules base-on principles and ignoring non essentials. 10th then there were
two books “Green book” and “Red book”.
1949 : ALA and LC between.
We need to know the Red book. 11th this is about the Basilian Monastery at Mount Sinai. Devide
case by case, ignoring the principles, ignoring user’s need of clarity and consistency.
Lubetzky, Seymour, 1949.
His work 12th is cataloguing Rules and Principles 13th “a critic for ALA method”.
J.Knox says that Lubetzky is genius and simple. He out of those confusing rules and then asking
wheter the rules are needed or not.
14th Is the Paris Priciples made by Lubetzky that then 15th use as a world of universal framework
in cataloguing code which ill reform the bibliographic cooperation.
1968 Two codes
AACR 16th use in many places than Lubetzky, but it still unable to join the US and the UK. This
also can’t stand longer because people prefer to use Universal Bibliographical Control than any
confusing code.
1968 MARC and ISBD
Marc is not a cataloguing system, but MARC is a complete framework. Then ISBD is a
complete design of the MARC framework, to set a new code for a new bibliographical world.

1978 AACR2
AACR2 says that ISBD is not natural and it’strange’.
OPAC’s and Web-PAC’s
Change the Universal Bibliographical Control to Metadata, we will use the data from book
randomly and freely with no boundaries to seek some entry. Since this, cataloguing is not part of
Library Science, but more than Infornation Science.