Dear Colleagues, I'm working remotely so I cannot check any references at my Seminary Library desk. As I recall the single date "s" is to be used when the date is certain or probable. 5783 might be any of 9 months of 2023 or any of 3 months of 2022. When the odds are 3 to 1 of the later date, I think we are justified in using the later date and not both years as questionable. Is not 9 months out of 12 a high probability? Thank you. Clifford Miller, speaking for myself and not for Library of the Jewish Theological Seminary
From: Heb-naco <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Gottschalk, Haim via Heb-naco Sent: Monday, November 14, 2022 5:25 PM To: Miller, Caroline <[email protected]>; Hebrew Name Authority Funnel <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Heb-NACO] Date Status (DtSt) and Dates in the fixed field CAUTION: This email originated from outside JTSA. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi Caroline, Haim here. What I do is use the first date as THE date with the DtSt: s. Granted we don't know fully if the date is 2012 or 2013, but this is the practice we do. The questionable date is when there is no date whatsoever in Hi Caroline, Haim here. What I do is use the first date as THE date with the DtSt: s. Granted we don't know fully if the date is 2012 or 2013, but this is the practice we do. The questionable date is when there is no date whatsoever in the book and we have to surmise when it was published. I do use a detailed date (DtSt: e) when I have the month available, such as erev Rosh Hodesh Nisan, plus year. I hope that this helps Haim Expressing my views. Ideas & opinions in this email are not intended to represent those of the Library of Congress or its staff. From: Heb-naco <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> On Behalf Of Miller, Caroline via Heb-naco Sent: Monday, November 14, 2022 4:49 PM To: HEB-NACO List Posting ([email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>) <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: [Heb-NACO] Date Status (DtSt) and Dates in the fixed field All, This may sound like a newbie question but I have never seen an official policy on coding the date status for materials that only have a Hebrew date. It's clear in RDA and the PS's how to transcribe the date in the 264. Example All, This may sound like a newbie question but I have never seen an official policy on coding the date status for materials that only have a Hebrew date. It's clear in RDA and the PS's how to transcribe the date in the 264. Example from the book I'm cataloging: 673 [1912 or 1913] I have seen this coded in the fixed field as: DtSt: s Dates 1912 , DtSt: q Dates 1912 , 1913 Is there an official policy on MARC coding for these fixed fields? I've done a little hunting on Heb-NACO and couldn't find any official guidance. Thanks. Caroline Caroline R. Miller Team Leader, Discovery Team UCLA Library Resource Acquisitions and Metadata Services 2400 Life Sciences Building 621 Charles E Young Drive South Box 957230 Los Angeles, CA 90095-7230
_______________________________________________ Heb-naco mailing list [email protected] https://lists.osu.edu/mailman/listinfo/heb-naco
