Why would this be an exception to the P-N practice? I don't see it addressed there as an exception. It seems to me that we have here two BIBCO instructions that are in conflict (if you're not doing PCC cataloging, then its not an issue).
Greta de Groat Stanford University Libraries ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paradis Daniel" <daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca> To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Sent: Saturday, May 18, 2013 8:15:10 AM Subject: [RDA-L] RE : [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD With the latest update to the RDA Toolkit, instruction 2.8.1.1 now includes the sentence: Consider all online resources to be published. Daniel Paradis Bibliothécaire Direction du traitement documentaire des collections patrimoniales Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec 2275, rue Holt Montréal (Québec) H2G 3H1 Téléphone : 514 873-1101, poste 3721 Télécopieur : 514 873-7296 daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca<mailto:daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca> http://www.banq.qc.ca<http://www.banq.qc.ca/> _____ De: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access de la part de J. McRee Elrod Date: ven. 2013-05-17 23:12 À: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : Re: [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD Greta asked: >So, if we are supposed to be cataloging online monographs according to Prov= >ider-neutral guidelines, wouldn't that mean that they would still be catalo= >ged as unpublished? If it is electronic, it is considered published. J. McRee (Mac) Elrod 4493 Lindholm Road Victoria BC V9C 3Y1 Canada (250) 474-3361 m...@elrod.ca
