Since RDA does not address this situation specifically, you must apply the RDA principles to your decision. Under the principle of representation (put down what you see), if you believe that '61' is the date of production, then you must record it as it appears on the source of information.
Here are the steps I used: -------------------------- 2.7.6 Date of Production 2.7.6.2 Sources of Information (SOI): "Take dates of production from any source." 2.7.6.3 Recording Date of Production: " Record the date of production by applying the basic instructions at 2.7.1." 2.7.1 Basic Instructions on Recording Production Statements 2.7.1.4 Recording Production Statements: "Record dates of production as they appear on the source of information. Apply the general guidelines on transcription for words that are not numbers (see 1.7). Apply the general guidelines on numbers expressed as numerals or as words (see 1.8)." 2.7.6.7 Archival Resources and Collections: "If no date can be found in the resource or determined from any other source, estimate the nearest year, decade, century, or other interval as precisely as possible. Indicate that the information was taken from a source outside the resource itself (see 2.2.4)." 2.2.4. Other Sources of Information: LC-PCC PS: "LC practice/PCC practice: Use square brackets if information taken from a source outside a resource itself is supplied in any of the elements listed." ----------------------- Since the 2.7.6.2 SOI is Any, I would interpret that to would mean that if you could not find the date in the resource, but could determine it from any other source, you would enter it without square brackets. But if 61 is indeed the date of production, and is given on the resource that way, your only option, as far as I can see is to enter it as given. Is it given as 61 by any chance? If so, I would include that punctuation. Date of Production (264_0$c): 61 Note on Production (500$a): The date of production that is given on the resource as 61 is actually 1961. In MARC you would enter 1961 as the 008Date1, and in most OPACs that is the date that will display in lists. Once we are out of MARC we will be able to set up our displays more easily that we do now, and so could, if we choose, display a Note on Production right after the Production Statement. Personally, I rather like the idea of extending the optional addition allowed for dates not of the Gregorian or Julian calendars and for Chronograms, to incomplete dates (Date of Production: 61 [1961]). But if that is not in line with the RDA thinking on this, then I would suggest the following change to the last paragraph at 2.7.6.3, just to clarify matters: Change: If the date as it appears in the resource is known to be fictitious or incorrect, make a note giving the actual date (see 2.20.6.3). To: If the date as it appears in the resource is known to be fictitious, incorrect, or incomplete, make a note giving the actual date (see 2.20.6.3). 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 L'Écuyer-Coelho Marie-Chantal Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2013 2:15 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Date given in an incomplete form Hi! Yes, I am dealing with the original intaglio. Marie-Chantal L'Ecuyer-Coelho 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 3730 <mailto:mc.coe...@banq.qc.ca> mc.coe...@banq.qc.ca <http://www.banq.qc.ca> www.banq.qc.ca Avis de confidentialité Ce courriel est une communication confidentielle et l'information qu'il contient est réservée à l'usage exclusif du destinataire. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire visé, vous n'avez aucun droit d'utiliser cette information, de la copier, de la distribuer ou de la diffuser. Si cette communication vous a été transmise par erreur, veuillez la détruire et nous en aviser immédiatement par courriel. -----Message d'origine----- De : J. McRee Elrod [ <mailto:m...@slc.bc.ca> mailto:m...@slc.bc.ca] Envoyé : 8 août 2013 13:26 À : <mailto:=?iso-8859-1?Q?L=27=C9cuyer-Coelho_Marie-Chantal?=@kepler.riq.qc.ca> =?iso-8859-1?Q?L=27=C9cuyer-Coelho_Marie-Chantal?=@kepler.riq.qc.ca; L'Écuyer-Coelho Marie-Chantal Cc : <mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca> RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : Re: [RDA-L] Date given in an incomplete form Marie-Chantal posted: >I am presently describing an etching. The artist simply wrote 61 ... 264 0 $a]Place, Jurisdiction] :$bArtist's Name,$c[19]61. This assumes the artist's name appears on the etching. If it is a reproduction as apposed to the original etching, the 264 2nd indicator would be "1". While we are not allowed to supply missing letters or numbers in 245, we can in 264 as I understand it. Waiting for a note to see a correction is one of the greatest weaknesses of RDa. __ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod ( <mailto:m...@slc.bc.ca> m...@slc.bc.ca) {__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing <HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/> HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/ ___} |__ \__________________________________________________________
