The following paragraph may need a revision resulted from the change on a
jacket as a part of the resource itself. I do not see it in the document. I
do not know whom I should report it to. So I post the information here.
*2.3.6.1 Variant titles include the following:*
* *
*a) those that appear
I work quite a bit with corporate publications. Under AACR2, there are
rules about when a corporate publication is to be entered under the corporate
body, and when it is to be entered under title with the corporate body as a
710. Is this still the same in RDA? Or are all corporate
Look at 19.2.1.1.1 Corporate Bodies Considered to Be Creators. My feeling
is that the rule is quite same as AACR2.
Joan Wang
Illinois Heartland Library System
On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 9:02 AM, Saunders, Mary mary.saund...@maine.govwrote:
I work quite a bit with corporate publications.
If you're using (and learning, as I am) the RDAToolkit, click on the Resources
tab, then click the plus sign by AACR2. Then keep working your way through the
contents until you get to AACR2 21.1B2. When the rule comes up, look for the
blue highlighted RDA tab next to 21.1B2 General Rule. Click
RDA 19.2.1.1.1, Corporate bodies considered to be creators
John Attig
Authority Control Librarian
Penn State University
jx...@psu.edu
- Original Message -
| From: Mary Saunders mary.saund...@maine.gov
| To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
| Sent: Tuesday, April 9, 2013 10:02:45 AM
|
We came across another issue with putting place names in the 370 in the form
used in a qualifier. There is a place established as:
Linyi (Shandong Sheng, China : South)
How does that get entered in 370 $e? Linyi, Shandong Sheng, China ?
What happens with the South part? (There is another Linyi
At a NACO workshop on RDA authority records held last month, a trainer
from COIN reiterated the provision at DCM, Z1, 370, General, para. 1, a).
Then, a reminder was added that, for placement under authority field 370s,
it should be Korea and *not* Korea (South) [or *not* Korea (North)
for
The DCM Z1 says to remove terms for jurisdiction or other distinguishing terms.
So:
Korea not Korea (South)
Russia not Russia (Federation)
and Linyi, Shandong Sheng, China without the qualifier South
^^
Adam L. Schiff
Principal Cataloger
University of
This strikes me as similar to the old NACO rule of thumb, Don't add
cross-reference for a variant of a variant.
I.e.: Don't add a qualifier to a qualifier.
It makes sense for a heading.
Though I admit I'm still puzzled why we are doing this, and other changes, for
the 370 (other than,
Tue, Apr 9 Saunders, Mary mary.saund...@maine.govwrote:
I work quite a bit with corporate publications. Under AACR2, there
are rules about when a corporate publication is to be entered under the
corporate body, and when it is to be entered under title with the
corporate body as a 710.
John Hostage wrote
We came across another issue with putting place names in the 370 in the form
used in a qualifier. There is a place established as:
Linyi (Shandong Sheng, China : South)
... Is the place established correctly according to RDA? It's complicated by
the fact that the authority
Ben Abrahamse wrote:
This strikes me as similar to the old NACO rule of thumb, Don't add cross-
reference for a variant of a variant.
I.e.: Don't add a qualifier to a qualifier.
It makes sense for a heading.
It does not make sense to me, when you end up with a qualifier that is
Kevin,
I think you raise some good points, certainly. I would be the first to admit my
analogy (really, more of mnemomic device) is weak.
Now, I didn't come up with this rule in DCMZ, so I'm not going to fall on my
sword for it.
But I do think it's worth considering that a heading (or
Actually if you look at videocassettes under 3.5.1.4.3, it says to use mm. I
missed this at first, too, but I guess you would use 127 mm. It would probably
be helpful if there were a VHS example in RDA as that is the one that the
average cataloger is most likely to encounter.
Kelley
The
I've been using 13 mm, but it would be very helpful to have an example.
Greta de Groat
Stanford University Libraries
On 4/9/2013 1:34 PM, Kelley McGrath wrote:
Actually if you look at videocassettes under 3.5.1.4.3, it says to use mm. I
missed this at first, too, but I guess you would use 127
Mark:
I need your help with classification of microfiche titles. We get law books
recommended for libraries titles on microfiche. Should I put the date the
microfiche is created or the original date of publication of the item?
I think DtSt has to be s and Dates: should be single date for the
Thanks for the replies. We don't have a subscription to the Toolkit and
will not for the foreseeable future, so I'm having to wing it and learn
by example as far as trying to know what might be right or wrong in an
RDA record as far as copy-cataloging. (We don't do much original
cataloging
We don't have a subscription to the Toolkit ...
Have you tried the MRIs?
http://special-cataloguing.com/mris
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__
Angelina Joseph said:
I think DtSt has to be s and Dates: should be single date for the filming
year. 264 has the microfilming year, and 776 gets the date and other info for
the original. So what should be the year I should have in the call
number?
Se use r, with date one the microfilm
19 matches
Mail list logo
