If the resource has an edition statement on one of the preferred sources, then record it (2.5.2.3).
a) the same source as the title proper (see 2.3.2.2) b) another source within the resource itself (see 2.2.2) c) one of the other sources of information specified at 2.2.4. Whether or not it has an edition statement, you could (would be advised to) add Font Size (3.13) "large print", in either the 300$a or 340$n or both, from "evidence presented by the resource itself (or on any accompanying material or container) as the basis for recording font size. Take additional evidence from any source." This will be enough to meet the principles of differentiation (0.4.3.1) and sufficiency (0.4.3.2), and will be enough to prevent machine record mergers. Deborah - - - - - - - - Deborah Fritz TMQ, Inc. debo...@marcofquality.com www.marcofquality.com -----Original Message----- From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of J. McRee Elrod Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2013 6:06 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Still doing edition statements for large print? Kristen Nortrup posted: >There's nothing obvious in RDA that indicates a statement on the t.p. >verso like 'Large print edition' no longer gets a 250. With the absence of the GMD "[text (large print)]", and in the absence of an RDA content term for large print, this edition statement is vital. It should be transcribed if present, and supplied in square brackets if lacking. I suspect some cataloguers don't think to look at the title page verso unless lacking imprint date, but we should now that we can take data from anywhere in the item without using brackets. Having the edition statement might also prevent an unwanted record merger? __ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca) {__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/ ___} |__ \__________________________________________________________
