Thomas Brenndorfer said: >In RDA, if there are four creators listed in the statement of >responsibility, the first would go in a 100 and the rest in 700 >fields. In AACR2, because of the rule of three, the first listed >would go in a 700 field and the rest would be dropped. That's one >significant change in RDA from AACR2.
In RDA it is required to transcribe and trace only one. Some RDA records for manifestations with two or three authors may have fewer creator entries than an AACR2 record would have had. It is true that more RDA records will have 100 and 110 (e.g., treaties) than AACR2, due to the end of the rule of three. I see no advantage in combining 100/240 or 100/245 in nuMARC. They only need to be combined in 600 and 700. In new title lists we print, we give the 100 once, with 245s after in alphabetic order. I see no need to repeat the 100 in print or OPAC display before each title. I suspect we will abandon all print poducts with nuMARC, and leave our clients to cope in terms of OPAC display. We've never seen an OPAC display we like better than unlabeled ISBD. We agree with Martha Yee: http://slc.bc.ca/yee.pdf __ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca) {__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/ ___} |__ \__________________________________________________________
