Talk about a digital divide! And what do the yahoos (sarcasm) do who do not have access to a computer?
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 9:18 AM, Paul Burley <p-bur...@northwestern.edu>wrote: > Adam: > > >>>"There is only one version of RDA that counts now, and that is the one > that is available through the RDA Toolkit, or, lacking that, the printed > loose-leaf version of RDA sold by ALA, CLA, CILIP, etc." > > I disagree. Any given standard can only have a _single_ authoritative > source. If there's any difference between RDA Online and the print version > of RDA, no matter how minor, the print version is _not_ an authoritative > source of RDA. Even the correction of a spelling error in RDA Online > renders > the print version non-authoritative. > > >>>"The actual RDA is what counts now and it really behooves all of us who > comment on specific instructions to have access to it." > > So those with access to RDA Online can comment, hash out the fine points, > and be an active participant in the understanding and adoption of RDA. > Those > using the print version of RDA, or the drafts, should remain passive > participants in the process until they have access to the "actual RDA". > Correct? > > That seems valid to me, but the consequences are pretty serious in terms of > the adoption of RDA. If someone like myself owns the print version, has an > active interest in RDA, and has found points of interest and problems in > RDA, the delay that results in putting off those questions/discussion until > I have access to RDA Online is problematic. > > Paul Burley > > Paul R. Burley > Technical Services Librarian > Northwestern University Transportation Library > 1970 Campus Drive > Evanston, Illinois 60208-2300 > > Phone, 847-491-5274 > Fax, 847-491-8601 > Transportation Library: > http://www.library.northwestern.edu/transportation/ > > -----Original Message----- > From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access > [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Adam L. Schiff > Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2011 2:18 PM > To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA > Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Thoughts re: 336-338 for a streaming video file > > > But, in the version of RDA which I read, at 3.4.1.3 we were referred > > to 3.4.1.5 for other unit names (aka SMDs) which may be used in > > collation (aka carrier type and extent). > > There is only one version of RDA that counts now, and that is the one that > is available through the RDA Toolkit, or, lacking that, the printed > loose-leaf version of RDA sold by ALA, CLA, CILIP, etc. Note that > corrected typos and other changes that are being made at regular update > intervals in the Toolkit will not be reflected in the printed version that > the publishers sell. > > It really makes no sense anymore to be referring to earlier drafts of > these rules and basing policies on them. The actual RDA is what counts > now and it really behooves all of us who comment on specific instructions > to have access to it. > > Adam > > ************************************** > * Adam L. Schiff * > * Principal Cataloger * > * University of Washington Libraries * > * Box 352900 * > * Seattle, WA 98195-2900 * > * (206) 543-8409 * > * (206) 685-8782 fax * > * asch...@u.washington.edu * > ************************************** > -- Gene Fieg Cataloger/Serials Librarian Claremont School of Theology gf...@cst.edu
