The proposal was not approved, Summary of Decisions: Editorial Meeting Number Six, June 18, 2012
For best results, hear the following in Anne Robinson's voice. Or Elmo's.
Exterritoriality
The concept of exterritoriality has no connotation of place, and therefore should not be subdivided geographically. The work being cataloged may be assigned China—Law, postcoordinated with Exterritoriality. The proposal to permit geographic subdivision of Exterritoriality was not approved.
Don't individual localities define their laws regarding what is and isn't in their domain (even if they fight about it with other localities)?
Gatekeeping (Journalism)
Gatekeeping is not a new concept, but is instead a significant part of an editor’s traditional duties. The work should be assigned the heading Journalism—Editing. The proposal was not approved.
Image from hetemeel.com and titled by Bernie O'Hare.
Uh, yeah, cuz editing is the same as gatekeeping. Just because it's not a new part of the editor's duties, doesn't mean it doesn't bear describing. Maybe the heading is overdue, eh?
Gays—Violence against—Law and legislation
There is no precedent in LCSH for headings of the type [class of persons]—Violence against—Law and legislation and the meeting does not wish to set one. The work could be assigned some or all of the headings Gays—Violence against; Gays—Legal status, laws, etc.; and Homophobia—Law and legislation. The proposal was not approved.
I don't get why SACO gets bossy over how catalogers use subdivision headings (forgive me if my nomenclature is off). Mix & match, kids!
Grandparents as parents
Grandparents may act as parents without there being a formal custodial agreement. The work should be assigned Grandparents as parents post-coordinated with Custodial parents. The proposal was not approved.
Clearly I've got a learning curve with the not approved list because I'm confused here. Grandparents as parents is already a heading What exactly has "the meeting" rejected? Also, I don't think custodial agreements are essential to parenting.
Sex differences in education
This proposal was made to add a UF Education—Sex differences to the established heading. There is no pattern for such UFs in LCSH. In addition, the meeting notes that since education is a non-gendered concept, it cannot have sex differences. The proposal was not approved.
I'm having a difficult time with "education is a non-gendered concept." Anyone else?
Comments
Bill (not verified)
Mon, 07/16/2012 - 4:14pm
Permalink
jenna, the summaries of
jenna, the summaries of decisions are largely meaningless unless you know what was being proposed in the first place. You can't make sense of the minutes unless you've looked at the tentative list of proposed additions and changes that were up for decision ( http://classificationweb.net/tentative-subjects/1207.html ). They leave out crucial information in the summaries, under the assumption that you wouldn't be interested in the decisions unless you were already interested in the proposals.
jenna
Tue, 07/17/2012 - 12:57pm
Permalink
Thanks, Bill. I'll did into
Thanks, Bill. I'll did into the proposals, as well.