Hello
I need to prepare simple inhouse documentation for non-BK materials and
am wondering whether or how we should use fields 344-347 for sound
recordings, videos, CD-ROMs and suchlike, to cover the details which
used to go in 300 $b.
In the Toolkit the RDAMARC mapping still points to 300
Right!
Thanks to all of you for your help with this, especially to Kevin Randall.
Here is the rationale I have built—please let me know where the flaws are in
the logic, because both of the conclusions contradict what I have been taught
in every RDA training webinar I have taken!
1.
Not trying to harp on a ., but I do have some questions which hopefully
Kevin or someone else can help resolve:
When LC-PCC PS says that we should give no period at the end of 300
if there is no 490, or to give a period if there *is* a 490
Would this have anything to do with the fact that 490
Perhaps I should qualify my questions with: cataloging in OCLC Connexion
and in bib. records of most paragraph breaks.
Jack
Jack Wu
Franciscan University of Steubenville
j...@franciscan.edu
Jack Wu j...@franciscan.edu 4/25/2013 9:24 AM
Not trying to harp on a ., but I do have some
Arthur,
Thanks so much. That is all helpful. My example is a judge who was a Lord of
Appeal in Ordinary and was created a life peerage. I am weirded out that RDA
doesn't actually define proper name. In Lord Collins of Mapesbury (Lawrence
Collins, Baron Collins of Mapesbury).
I think this
Cannot agree with John any more :)
Joan Wang
Illinois Heartland Library System
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 9:34 AM, John Hostage host...@law.harvard.eduwrote:
A few points:
**· **It would make the most sense if all of us doing shared
cataloging in OCLC or otherwise would
Actually, it seems to me that ISBD display has been on the way out for a long
time now, and I really can't see it coming back. Of course, we've left that
pretty much all to the whims of the developers of the commercial systems
anyway, so it's anybody's guess as to what we'll see in the future.
You should allow the U.S. Metric Association to provide some assistance.
Here’s a quick guide
http://lamar.colostate.edu/~hillger/common.html
and a set of exercises for those who have trouble with this matter
http://lamar.colostate.edu/~hillger/correct.htm
One no longer needs to wonder what to
I still see double dots everywhere. [?]
Wojciech Siemaszkiewicz
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 12:18 PM, Brenndorfer, Thomas
tbrenndor...@library.guelph.on.ca wrote:
You should allow the U.S. Metric Association to provide some assistance.**
**
** **
Here’s a quick guide
At the moment, the University of North Texas Music Library is indeed using the
34x fields as relevant, but since they don't yet display in our public catalog,
we are also putting the relevant information in 300 $b, which does display.
Once the display issues are straightened out, we will stop
In the (hopefully soon, but for sure I'm not holding my breath!) future, we
will likely—or at least should—be entering RDA elements into workforms with no
punctuation at all, unless that punctuation is part of the element itself
(e.g., the period in an abbreviation, the question mark in Who's
I wholeheartedly agree with you Kevin. Ending the practice of including ISBD
punctuation in recorded data will clear up a lot of this confusion in practice.
I know it's something that has been discussed in the pcc, as well I'm sure by
the bib-frame people.
Still, in the end I question whether
All the time I feel that cataloging should be an easy job except
classification and subject analysis. It should more like a data entry in an
Excel sheet. All check/radio boxes or drop-down lists are there. But
apparently I am wrong :)
Thanks,
Joan Wang
Illinois Heartland Library System
On Thu,
Just a question here. I just looked at the revised subject headings
according to RDA.
I noticed War--Religious aspects--Islam--Quranic teaching.
Why isn't it simply War--Quranic teaching ?
Are all topics -- [Scriptural teaching] going to be changed to:
Topic--Religious
John Hostage posted:
We need to get away from adding punctuation just to make our records
look âpretty.â
Why? Looking ugly is a goal?
Isn't looking pretty another way of saying easier to read and
comprehend? Less vagary in punctuation seems good to me, including
end punctuation for all
Bernadette O'Reilly asked:
- whether other agencies expect to use 34X straight away or will
continue to use 300 $b at least until LC-PCC and specialist bodies
produce best practice guidelines
SLC will continue to use 300 :$b, and will not code 34X, in part for
consistency with legacy records (it
Marilou Hincecliff said:
2. Notes are a new paragraph.
On cards and in most OPACs, *each* note is a new paragraph.
3. Our Voyager ILS (and OCLC) doesnât know how to display any
of the prescribed punctuationâ ...
Simpler just just end all 1XX-8XX with final punctuation, without
Ben,
I absolutely agree that different spelling and writing conventions
should be accepted (and I think RDA allows for this in the alternative
at 1.7). This is simply necessary if RDA is applied internationally. For
example, spacing conventions sometimes differ between the American and
the
I followed this discussion on Autocat and now here.
As long as we are making changes, why are we not doing that now? It seems
to me that it would be a whole heck of a lot easier to just say Never end
a field with a full stop. Let's face it ... the whole thing of when to
add a period and when not
Dear collective wisdom,
I and another cataloger here at CUNY Central Office have two questions
regarding creating personal name authority records using RDA:
1. The more theoretical question. In fields 372 and 374 (field of activity
and occupation), the instructions in RDA give very generic
Dear collective wisdom,
I and another cataloger here at CUNY Central Office have two questions
regarding creating personal name authority records using RDA:
1. The more theoretical question. In fields 372 and 374 (field of activity
and occupation), the instructions in RDA give very generic
Why isn't simply War--Qurʼanic teaching?
Well, maybe the simple answer is this:
The scope note for Qurʼanic teaching says USE subdivision Qurʼanic
teaching under Islamic topics. War is not an Islamic topic while the
structured free-floating subdivision Religious aspects--Islam is a Islamic
topic
22 matches
Mail list logo
