Thanks to all who responded. I have decided to make a single 264 1
[Charleston, SC?] : $b Author's name, $c [2013]
As I feel my way along with RDA, I am truly grateful for this discussion
list!
Mary Saunders, Cataloger
Maine State Library
64 State House
Hi Mary
I agree wholeheartedly - ever SO grateful for this list !
And, if I may say so, I think your final decision is SPOT ON!
I believe we are encouraged to SUPPLY a place of publication or probable place
whenever possiblewhich is what you've done.
And you obviously KNOW that the book is
I'm sorry if this has been covered recently. I seem to remember something
similar. If I have a book with a copyright date of 2011 and the t.p. verso
statement This catalogue is published in conjunction with the exhibition 'The
Confused Art' on view at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York
I would use [2011] as the publication date.
Adam Schiff
University of Washington Libraries
-Original Message-
From: Mitchell, Michael
Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 7:50 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: [RDA-L] Catalog publication date
I'm sorry if this has been covered
It would not be correct to use “SC” in your place of publication. If you are
supplying a date, you wouldn’t use a postal abbreviation. Either [Charleston]
or [Charleston, South Carolina].
Adam Schiff
From: Patricia Mary Gierke
Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 7:21 AM
To:
Oops, I meant if you are supplying a place, you wouldn’t use a postal
abbreviation.
From: Adam Schiff
Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 8:39 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] 264 question
It would not be correct to use “SC” in your place of publication. If you are
Per Appendix B.1 state names are included in the “approved” abbreviations. And
the LC-PCC Policy statement at 1.10.2 says local institutions can establish
their own guidelines for many things, including abbreviations.
Pat
Patricia Sayre-McCoy
Head, Law Cataloging and Serials
D’Angelo Law
Appendix B does not apply to “transcribed elements” (see B.4). The Pubication
Statement is a transcribed element (see 2.8.1.4). Also B.4 instructs “If
supplying all or part of a transcribed element, generally do not abbreviate
words.”
Bob
Robert L. Maxwell
Head, Special Collections and
A similar case is for accompanying materials. I consider it a whole-part
relationship. But they are encoded in $c of 300 fields. I was told that it
is a structured description. So
Thanks,
Joan Wang
On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Heidrun Wiesenmüller
wiesenmuel...@hdm-stuttgart.de wrote:
Sorry. Should be $e of 300 fields :)
On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 11:10 AM, Joan Wang jw...@illinoisheartland.orgwrote:
A similar case is for accompanying materials. I consider it a whole-part
relationship. But they are encoded in $c of 300 fields. I was told that it
is a structured description.
Mary Saunders said:
I have decided to make a single 264 1 [Charleston, SC?] : $b Author's
name, $c [2013]
This would satisfy your patrons' needs better than the other options.
But a postal code should not be provided in brackets. Correctly it
would by South Carolina, or as a local option,
But in this case, there’s nothing to transcribe. The place of publication is
cataloger supplied.
Pat
Patricia Sayre-McCoy
Head, Law Cataloging and Serials
D’Angelo Law Library
University of Chicago
773-702-9620
p...@uchicago.edu
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and
Yes, but the information you have is for the place of manufacture, not the
place of publication. You are guessing a place of publication based on the
place of manufacture, so when supplying the place of publication it would not
be a transcription. So it would either be [Charleston] or
I'm confused as to why rda has an appendix for abbreviations including
geographic locations.. Anyone know when we use these? I assumed we we once
again using them for place of publication? Anyone know please clear my
confusion for me.
Thanks!
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 3, 2013, at 11:57 AM,
Use the abbreviations in table
B.1http://access.rdatoolkit.org/document.php?id=rdaappbtarget=rdab-399#rdab-399for
the names of certain countries and for the names of states, provinces,
territories, etc., of Australia, Canada, and the United States when the
names are recorded:
a)/as part of the
Sorry, should be for authorized access points (headings).
On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 12:24 PM, Joan Wang jw...@illinoisheartland.orgwrote:
Use the abbreviations in table
B.1http://access.rdatoolkit.org/document.php?id=rdaappbtarget=rdab-399#rdab-399for
the names of certain countries and for
Thank you for the advice! I was overthinking that one.
Michael Mitchell
Technical Services Librarian
Brazosport College
Lake Jackson, TX
Michael.mitchell at brazosport.edu
-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
How can I understand a photocopy of a thesis? I guess that many theses
could be photocopies. Do we still consider theses as manuscripts under RDA?
If look at the definition in RDA Toolkit, they are not. But if look at OCLC
special cataloging guidelines, they are.
Happy fourth!
Joan Wang
Illinois
The abbreviations are used for the larger place in which a local place is
located.
This is used in authorized access points:
151 $a Seattle (Wash.)
And in the location of a conference or location of a corporate body or family
and place of origin of work:
111 2_ $a International Conference
I feel that in this case it would be very helpful if there was another
example under Rule 2.8.2.6.2 with a state name spelled out, and if there was
at least one example with a state name spelled out under Rule 2.8.2.6.4, to
reinforce that when supplying the name of a jurisdiction the name
Joan Wang posted:
Do we still consider [print] theses as manuscripts under RDA?
Yes, but all it affects in 264 2nd indicator. You provide 264 0
$aPlace, Jurisdiction :$bDegree Granting Institution,$cyear. This is
one of the few major improvements of RDA over AACR2.
Shorten, Jay
Joan Wang jw...@illinoisheartland.org wrote:
I initially thought that RDA does not involve encoding. MARC encoding is
another thing and technique. But it is hard, at least so far, to completely
distinguish RDA, a resource description rule, from MARC encoding. We still
can see shades of MARC
J. McRee Elrod m...@slc.bc.ca wrote:
Yes, but all it affects in 264 2nd indicator. You provide 264 0
$aPlace, Jurisdiction :$bDegree Granting Institution,$cyear.
Does the Degree Granting Institution produce the thesis? Or the student?
...
My 502 for the thesis is: $b Th. D. $c
Dana said:
I feel that in this case it would be very helpful if there was another
example under Rule 2.8.2.6.2 with a state name spelled out
You transcribe in 264$a what is on the item, and more often than not,
the jurisdiction is abbreviated. If supplying in brackets, spell it
out. NEVER
Heidrun Wiesenmüller wiesenmuel...@hdm-stuttgart.de wrote:
In 2.8.6.3 (Recording date of publication) there is an example May 2000.
This shows that not only the year, but also the month and presumably even
the exact date of publication is to be recorded in this element, if it is
given in the
Mark asked:
Does the Degree Granting Institution produce the thesis? Or the student?
The student might have been 264 3 earlier, but physically producing
it is not publication. While the student probably typed that 1948
thesis, it was not a thesis until accepted by the institution. The
Autocatters RDA-lers,
It was my assumption that we would have to follow LC/LAC authority
forms. But we are encountering opposition to approximately replacing
ca., and I agree. It makes an unsightly access point.
I'm suggesting we weplace ca. and approximately with a question
mark following
27 matches
Mail list logo
