ISO TC 46/SC 9 Secretariat Library and Archives of Canada 395 Wellington Street Ottawa, CANADA K1A 0N4 ISO TC 46/SC 9 Secrétariat Bibliothèque et Archives du Canada 395, rue Wellington Ottawa, CANADA K1A 0N4 Telephone - Téléphone (819) 994-6939 Fax : (819) 953-0291 E-mail: iso.tc46.sc9@lac-bac.gc.ca ISO/TC 46/SC 9 N 402 Report of the ISO/TC 46/SC 9 Ad Hoc Group meeting on the revision of ISO 690 and ISO 690-2 October 27, 2004 Washington, DC Participants: Jane Thacker (ISO/TC 46/SC 9 Secretariat); Françoise Bourdon (France); Ikuko Sugano (Japan); Emily Zhang (China); Shaohua He (China); Tiekun Wang (China). The purpose of this meeting was to solicit comments on the Working Draft in SC 9 document N 378 which will be forward to the Project Leader, Mr. George Richardson of the U.K., for his consideration as editor of the revised ISO 690 and ISO 690-2 guidelines for bibliographic references. Participants began by discussing whether ISO 690 and ISO 690-2 should be merged into a single International Standard, as proposed by BSI. Françoise Bourdon agreed that it would be best to merge the two parts into a single document. However, she also noted that because the guidelines are used mainly by individuals, particularly students, the formal presentation of an ISO standard means that the document might not be structured in a way that best suits its intended audience. Individuals are not prepared to sift through a standard from the first to last pages. Instead, they look first for outlines and examples that will solve their specific questions. Examples are of much more interest to these users than textual explanation and theory. Ikuko Sugano agreed that both parts of ISO 690 should be merged into a single document. In Japan only the second part (i.e. ISO 690-2) has been adopted as a national standard because that is the focus of interest. She agreed that the format of an International Standard might be too elaborate for the intended audience of these guidelines. Her students seem to use only the examples. Recommendations and suggestions about the format of the project: ISO 690 and ISO 690-2 should be merged as proposed by BSI. The Working Draft should be redrafted in the form of a Technical Report to allow a less formal presentation of the guidelines, structured in a way that would be better suited to the majority of its target audience (e.g. as a handbook).
The best way to arrange information in the Technical Report would be by type of document. Examples should be prominent and presented by type of document. The Technical Report will need frequent revisions as new types of information resources are created. These additions could be handled on a Web site between editions. One suggestion is to appoint a permanent project leader who would be responsible for ongoing updates to the TR. One way to revise the guidelines is to build on questions from users and to cumulate the responses on a Web site, e.g. as Frequently Asked Questions. Although ISO policies are an obstacle to making these guidelines for bibliographic references freely available on the Web, it would be possible to provide a set of illustrative examples on a Web site. Suggestions for promoting the ISO 690 and ISO 690-2 revision project and soliciting participation Library and information studies educators should be involved. Faculty see the problems that students have in dealing with references to electronic information resources National and international associations for editors should also be approached. The European Association of Science Editors (EASE) has expertise in this area and a liaison with SC9. The Secretariat of EASE is based in the U.K. The Project Leader and SC 9 Secretariat could prepare a form letter to ISO's member bodies asking them to solicit participation in the ISO 690 revision project from library and documentation educators, editors associations, etc. A header should be added to the current Web pages for excerpts from ISO 690 and ISO 690-2 (http://www.lac-bac.gc.ca/iso/tc46sc9/standard/690-2e.htm) stating that these standards are being revised and asking users for their questions and needs for the next edition. The SC9 Secretariat has established a listserv discussion list called ISO690-L to facilitate discussion and participation in the project. Instructions for using ISO690-L are attached as Annex 1. Suggested changes to the Working Draft (document N 378) General: 1. The structure, content and examples need to be reconsidered so that electronic information resources are dealt with at the same level and have equal prominence with print publications (see comment on clause 17 below). Most users will be turning to this document for guidance on citing electronic information resources.
2. The current Working Draft mainly addresses what was in Part 1 of ISO 690. Material on citing Web sites, Weblogs, etc. is needed. 3. The scope should make it clear as to what is covered. For example, does the standard only deal with references to "published" items. Perhaps personal communications should be excluded from the standard. This needs to be made explicit in the scope. 4. The term "published" is problematic when dealing with information resources on the Web; perhaps another term should be used. 5. A new title for the Technical Report was suggested for consideration: Guidelines for bibliographic references and citations to information resources 6. Clause 2: Some of the normative references have dates and others don t. ISO directives state that such references should not be dated unless they are limited to a specific edition of a standard. Verify whether any of these references are specific to that particular edition of an ISO standard. If not, remove dates from the references. 7. Also consider that for a Technical Report, a section on normative references is too formal. Suggest moving this section to the Bibliography. 8. There were some concerns about the terminology used in the draft, e.g. serials and contributions. End users are probably not familiar with the term continuing resources now used in the library community. Terminology in the draft should connect to the terms used by students and other individuals using these guidelines. For example, students do not refer to contributions ; they use the term articles. 9. Change the term document to resource or information resource and the term "electronic document" to "electronic resource". ISBD(ER) and ISBD(CR) provide definitions for terms in the areas of electronic resources and continuing resources (serials). 10. Clause 3.15 (neat line): the technical term "graticule" also needs explanation. It is there because of the definition of "neat line". However, is it necessary to use the technical term "neat line" at item 7.1.2.c.3? If that item was changed to "a title within the grid or other border that encloses the detail of a map" then the entire definition at 3.15 could be removed. 11. Clause 3.16 (originator): concerns were expressed about the term originator. Consider using creator instead, which is the term used in the Dublin Core standard: Creator: An entity primarily responsible for making the content of the resource. 12. Clause 3.18 (serial), there is no ISO 10956 standard; that was the former number of the ISO work item that became ISO 690-2. Change or delete the reference. 13. The amount of coverage and examples for electronic information resources must be increased. 14. Put the section on the elements of a reference (currently clause 5) before the section on methods of citation (currently clause 4). 15. Clause 8 should be "Medium designation" not "Material designation"
16. Increase the number of references and examples for electronic documents. As a start the supplementary examples from the ISO 690-2 Web site could be added to the document. 17. Clause 14 (International standard numbers): also mention ISBN to explain the reference to ISO 2108. 18. Clause 17: given the prevalence of electronic information resources, it seems archaic to refer to them as a "Special categories" when in some areas of research they have overtaken the use of print resources. Electronic information resources should be dealt with at the same level as print publications, not treated as a special category after "cartographic materials". 19. Clause 17.2, change "thereto" to "thereof" (as in the current title of ISO 690-2) 20. Clause 17.2.4, correct "IMB/Tandy" to "IBM/Tandy" 21. Clause 17.2.5: the 2 nd example should record the month of July as "07" in ISO format (not "7"). However, all examples of dates in this Working Draft should be updated to something more recent (at least into the present millennium). 22. Change the 2 nd paragraph of 17.2.6 to read: "... it should include the network address for its location as well as the method of access to the document if that method is not apparent in the network address itself..." 23. Clause 17.2.6 (Availability and access): "Web site" should also be allowable as a availability statement. Revise to: "... identified by the words "Available from" or an equivalent phrase when appropriate." 24. Remove the angle brackets around URLs in the examples. These are no longer recommended practice as they cause problems reading HTML code in some applications. 25. Delete the phrase World Wide Web from the examples of availability statements and replace it with the phrase "Web site:" or "Available from:" or just "URL". For example, Example 6 at 17.2.6 should be changed from "Available from World Wide Web:" to "Available from: www..." or just "URL:...". 26. Check links in all examples to ensure they are still valid. If not, replace with new examples. 27. Remove the angle brackets from the examples of availability statements (e.g. at clause 17.2.6) 28. Remove all references to Gopher technology from the draft (e.g. delete the 3 rd example in clause 17.2.6). 29. Clause 18: consider changing "essential..." elements to "required and optional elements" and "Required elements" at the start of the second paragraph. 30. There was some discussion as to whether to present the basic outline of elements in a reference in the form of tables (as in Tables 1 and 2) or as a list (as in the current editions of ISO 690 and ISO 690-2). This was not resolved. Tables 1 and 2 need legends to explain that boldface indicates a required element and square brackets
indicate that an element is required if applicable? (or available?). Participants thought it would be better not to rely on typefaces to distinguish between required and optional elements. Columns for mandatory, required if available and optional could appear at the right side of each table with check marks indicating which applies to a specific element. 31. In their current form everything in Tables 1 and 2 appears to be at the same level of importance. Perhaps some of the material could be moved to a footnote referring to caveats and exceptions given in the main text of the standard. 32. Specify that Tables 1 and 2 are for printed and other physical formats. Add new tables for Web sites and digital resources. 33. It was noted that in practice ISBN are very rarely included in bibliographic references. 34. The relevance of the location element was discussed. If there are only a few copies of the resource in existence then it would be useful. How does the bibliographer know that there are only a few copies? Perhaps it should be rephrased as for manuscripts and similar unique items. Is the call number too much detail? 35. Annex A: Arrange the examples in Annex A by type of material to make it easier for users. 36. Annex A: Update the examples. As a start, the additional examples on the ISO 690-2 Web site could be added. See: http://www.lac-bac.gc.ca/iso/tc46sc9/standard/690-2ex.htm. 37. Annex B (Abbreviations in references): Delete the entire Annex B; it will never be sufficiently comprehensive at the international level. Replace with a clause in the text based on the last paragraph of clause 6.2 in ISO 690:1987: "With the exception of abbreviations that are in common use, the meaning of all abbreviations used in references... shall be given in a note or table." 38. Annex B: In the list of abbreviations, "tape" is not an abbreviation for "tape". 39. Bibliography: The bibliography is over weighted with transliteration standards. Suggest removing the list of specific transliteration standards because it's impossible to cover all languages. Instead, insert at appropriate places in the text a recommendation to "use appropriate international transliteration standards when available". End of meeting report. Instructions for using the ISO690-L discussion follow on next page
, Annex 1 INSTRUCTIONS FOR USING THE ISO690-L DISCUSSION LIST These are the instructions for using ISO690-L, a discussion list for participation in ISO/TC 46/SC 9 Project 690 on revision and amalgamation of the two ISO standards (ISO 690 and ISO690-2) on bibliographic references to information resources. Experts who wish to participate in the ISO 690 revision project are invited to subscribe to this discussion list. First, however, they should inform their national ISO member body about their intention to participation in this ISO project. Contact information for the ISO member body in each country is available on the central ISO Web site at: www.iso.org. The ISO690-L discussion list is hosted by Library and Archives Canada which provides the International Secretariat for ISO TC 46/SC 9. 1. To SUBSCRIBE to ISO690-L: Send an e-mail to LISTSERV@INFOSERV.NLC-BNC.CA in the form shown below. NOTE This address is different than the one used for sending messages to ISO690-L (see below). EXAMPLE: To: LISTSERV@INFOSERV.NLC-BNC.CA Subject: [leave the subject line blank] Message: SUBscribe ISO690-L FirstName LastName 1. To SEND MESSAGES to ISO690-L: Only subscribers can send messages to the ISO690-L discussion list. Messages must be sent from the same e-mail address under which the ISO690-L subscription is registered. Send messages to the ISO690-L subscribers via an e-mail message to: ISO690-L@INFOSERV.NLC-BNC.CA EXAMPLE: To: ISO690-L@INFOSERV.NLC-BNC.CA Subject: Comments on the title and author elements Message: I have the following comments on... NOTE File attachments (e,g, Word, Excel, PowerPoint, etc.) can be included in the e-mail message.
, Annex 1 3. To UNSUBSCRIBE from ISO690-L: Send an e-mail to LISTSERV@INFOSERV.NLC-BNC.CA in the form shown below. NOTE This address is different than the one used for sending messages to ISO690-L. EXAMPLE: To: LISTSERV@INFOSERV.NLC-BNC.CA Subject: [leave the subject line blank] Message: SIGNOFF ISO690-L Additional instructions on customizing the subscription options for ISO690-L are available on the Web site for ISO Project 690 at the following address: http://www.lac-bac.gc.ca/iso/tc46sc9/690.htm CONTACTING THE ISO690-L LIST ADMINISTRATOR: If you have questions about the ISO690-L discussion list or difficulty using one of its commands, contact the list administrator by e-mail to: ISO690-L-REQUEST@INFOSERV.NLC-BNC.CA. IMPORTANT Ensure that your message's subject line includes the word "ISO690-L". Subject lines that contain only words such as "Help" or "Problem" may be mistaken for spam messages and might be automatically deleted before they reach the list administrator.