Re: [RDA-L] References to a section that doesn't exist?
I am through chapter three. I have found a few misreferences or references that were only vaguely connected to the data element involved. As far as chapter three is concerned, it has to be rewritten and made a lot more compact. It strikes me that with all the references in each section, that should point to the idea that the new proposed code, RDA, is too diffuse. Gene Fieg Cataloger Claremont School of Theology [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greta de Groat Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2008 10:29 AM To: RDA-L@INFOSERV.NLC-BNC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] References to a section that doesn't exist? It could be misnumbered, did you look at the nearby rules? I've found two misnumbered references already. greta - Original Message - From: Tim Knight/osgoode [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: RDA-L@INFOSERV.NLC-BNC.CA Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2008 8:10:52 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: [RDA-L] References to a section that doesn't exist? I took a very quick look at 6.20 in preparation for diving in more fully. I was immediately discouraged to find references to a section that doesn't seem to exist: 6.20.1 Scope A title of a legal work is a word, phrase, character, or group of characters by which a legal work is known. For purposes of identifying legal works, titles of the work are categorized as follows: a) preferred title for a legal work (see 6.16.2) --? b) variant title for a legal work (see 6.16.3). --? The last rule in 6.16 is this musically related one: 6.16.1.13 Indeterminate Medium of Performance Maybe I'm just reading this wrong. Any one else having similar experiences? Tim - F. Tim Knight, Head of Technical Services Osgoode Hall Law School Library York University [EMAIL PROTECTED] (416) 650-8403 Fax: (416) 736-5298 http://library.osgoode.yorku.ca --
Re: [RDA-L] References to a section that doesn't exist?
It seems many of these misnumbered references through out the final draft. I wonder this could be considered not only the typos of the instruction numbers, but also having errors in Online RDA for linking each related instructions and/or creating certain workflows ... I was also feel discouraged to see the table of contents file (itself contains 113 p.!?) posted today. - Keiko -- Keiko Suzuki Japanese Catalog Librarian, East Asian Library Yale University Library Tel: (203)432-2778 / Fax: (203)432-7231 [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gene Fieg [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 28, 2008 8:57 AM To: RDA-L@INFOSERV.NLC-BNC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] References to a section that doesn't exist? I am through chapter three. I have found a few misreferences or references that were only vaguely connected to the data element involved. As far as chapter three is concerned, it has to be rewritten and made a lot more compact. It strikes me that with all the references in each section, that should point to the idea that the new proposed code, RDA, is too diffuse. Gene Fieg Cataloger Claremont School of Theology [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greta de Groat Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2008 10:29 AM To: RDA-L@INFOSERV.NLC-BNC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] References to a section that doesn't exist? It could be misnumbered, did you look at the nearby rules? I've found two misnumbered references already. greta - Original Message - From: Tim Knight/osgoode [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: RDA-L@INFOSERV.NLC-BNC.CA Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2008 8:10:52 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: [RDA-L] References to a section that doesn't exist? I took a very quick look at 6.20 in preparation for diving in more fully. I was immediately discouraged to find references to a section that doesn't seem to exist: 6.20.1 Scope A title of a legal work is a word, phrase, character, or group of characters by which a legal work is known. For purposes of identifying legal works, titles of the work are categorized as follows: a) preferred title for a legal work (see 6.16.2) --? b) variant title for a legal work (see 6.16.3). --? The last rule in 6.16 is this musically related one: 6.16.1.13 Indeterminate Medium of Performance Maybe I'm just reading this wrong. Any one else having similar experiences? Tim - F. Tim Knight, Head of Technical Services Osgoode Hall Law School Library York University [EMAIL PROTECTED] (416) 650-8403 Fax: (416) 736-5298 http://library.osgoode.yorku.ca --
Re: [RDA-L] References to a section that doesn't exist?
Keiko Suzuki wrote: I was also feel discouraged to see the [RDA] table of contents file (itself contains 113 p.!?) posted today. I hazard to think this is an exploded view of the online version of the contents rather than something one would properly use for a paper-based product. Mark K. Ehlert Contract Cataloging MINITEX
Re: [RDA-L] References to a section that doesn't exist?
Greta said:
It could be misnumbered, did you look at the nearby rules? I've
found two misnumbered references already.
I wonder if these blind and wrong references are the result of
renumbering in successive drafts, as opposed to typos?
Whatever the cause, this can not be a final draft.
When there is a misreference, you can find the correct one by topic
using Barnhard's index. If Bernhard could whip up an index so easily,
why could not JSC?
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__
