heb-naco  

Re: 260$c and Type of date (008/06)

Joseph Galron
Thu, 08 May 2008 07:28:13 -0700

I am against change! (i did not vote for the senator from illinois :-) )

We should explain OCLC and ask them to remove their example.

Yossi

On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 8:30 AM, Lovins, Daniel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

> Joan,
>
> We've been operating with the same understanding as LC going back as far as
> I remember (back to the days of Leonard Matthless): to use the code 's' with
> the first of the two possible gregorian dates. I think in my own mind I
> argued that it really *wasn't* a questionable date; we knew the date in the
> Hebrew calendar. It was the conversion into Gregorian terms that introduced
> the uncertainty, not the date itself. Sort of splitting hairs, I realize,
> but it had a certain logic to it. Maybe we should reconsider now that we've
> been assimilated into the One Big Utility?
>
> -- Daniel
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Joan C Biella
> Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2008 4:17 PM
> To: heb-naco@lists.acs.ohio-state.edu
> Subject: 260$c and Type of date (008/06)
>
> Friends,
>
> Here is a piece, or two pieces, of information which may interest you--or
> they may make you tear your hair and shriek "Is there no justice?!"  In
> spite of this risk, I think you should know.
>
> I received a query about how to code the fixed field for "Type of date"
> (008/06) when the 260$c has a year of the Jewish calendar followed by the
> two equivalent Gregorian years in brackets--e.g.,
>
> $c 744 [1983 or 1984]
>
> Which is right for the fixed field, (1) "q" (questionable date) followed by
> the two possible Gregorian years in the Date1 and Date2 fixed fields, or (2)
> "s" (single date) followed by the earlier Gregorian date in the Date1 field?
>
> As you know, LC follows practice (2), putting "s" in the 008/06 and, in the
> above example, "1983" in the 008/07-10.  But many other libraries follow
> practice (1) and use "q."
>
> I inquired into this problem, and found the justification for LC's practice
> in the discussion of the code "s" at
> http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd008a.html
> or
> http://www.itsmarc.com/crs/Bib0466.htm
>
> But I also learned that OCLC documentation, using the same "744" example,
> says to code it "q" (questionable date).  Why OCLC chooses to do this I
> don't know, but it sure explains why a lot of these are coded "q" in the
> OCLC database!
>
> Joan
>
>
>


-- 
Joseph (Yossi) Galron-Goldschlaeger
Head, Hebraica & Jewish Studies Library
The Ohio State University Libraries
6001 Ackerman Library,
610 Ackerman Road
Columbus, Ohio 43202-4500 USA
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel.: (614) 292-3362, Fax: (614)292-1918
URL: http://library.osu.edu/sites/jdc/jdc.php
Lexicon of Modern Hebrew Literature:
http://hebrewlit.notlong.com