Christopher Case <cca...@gmail.com> wrote: > All that having been said, in many many many LC RDA records, the 300 $c does > not end in a period. In many others, it does. Any clue as to why some lack > the period? For some examples, see OCLC #'s 677981165, 449856066, and > 587078028 (lacking period); and 308173544, 297147712, and 468854226 (with > period).
There's a disconnect among the ISBD, the MARC21 statement you quoted in your message, and LCPS 1.7.1 (section "Punctuation at the End of MARC Fields 245, 246-247, 250, 260, 300, 310/321, 362, 490"). Note that it is LC practice is to end the 300 with a period if there is a 490 series statement in the record; if no series statement, then no final period. (A closing parenthesis may end the 300, of course.) This practice was around well before RDA, so at this point, this LCPS just strikes me as a carry-over from the LCRI when "cm" ended with a period per AACR2. The same holds true for the LC's interpretation of the ending punctuation for the 260 field, which may not necessarily end with a period either. You may also want to check out the first paragraph of RDA Appendix D.1.2.1 and compare this the ISBD (2007) 0.3.2.3.* You'll see that the RDA text lacks the second half of the ISBD instruction. (Granted, the ISBD uses the word "may" in its text.) * <http://www.ifla.org/VII/s13/pubs/ISBD_consolidated_2007.pdf> -- Mark K. Ehlert Minitex Coordinator University of Minnesota Bibliographic & Technical 15 Andersen Library Services (BATS) Unit 222 21st Avenue South Phone: 612-624-0805 Minneapolis, MN 55455-0439 <http://www.minitex.umn.edu/>
