Sorry, the copyright symbol in my reply got automatically changed to (c).
That's what I get for replying in text format. :(
Steve McDonald
steve.mcdon...@tufts.edu
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
> [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of McDonald, Stephen
> Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 1:49 PM
> To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
> Subject: Re: [RDA-L] 264 with only a copyright date
>
> Gene Fieg asked, regarding the inclusion of copyright date and inferred
> publication date in an RDA record:
>
> > And how is the user supposed to make sense of this?
> > How are thesis advisors supposed to make sense of this when checking
> bibliographical citations?
> > How will it display????
>
> I don't see what you think is confusing about this. The user will look for a
> publication date, and will find it. What is confusing about that? The same
> with thesis advisors. What publication date do you think thesis advisors
> would expect to find? This inferred publication date is only used when there
> is no evidence of a publication date except the copyright date. A thesis
> advisor would almost certainly rather some guess of the publication date
> than no date at all. I would note that theses generally don't have copyright
> dates, and do have other dates which can be inferred as publication date. So
> this isn't usually an issue with theses anyway.
>
> As for how it will display, that is up to the ILS, of course. One reasonable
> way
> (but hardly the only possible way) it could be displayed is:
> Publication date: [2011]
> Copyright: (c)2011
>
> That's the way we have it set up in our catalog (Millennium, the same as you
> have, I believe).
>
> Steve McDonald
> steve.mcdon...@tufts.edu
