Nonexistent data for an element such as Production Statement can still mean there is a Production Statement.
There is also the method to record the subelements in a production statement or publication statement if known or probable data cannot be determined. A related manifestation element would still exist, and some of the production or publication could still be recorded even if it is only probable data, and so it makes sense to continue to keep that data separate. Place of Production: Place of production not identified Producer's Name: Producer not identified Date of Production: Date of production not identified Related Manifestation: Reproduction of (manifestation): Author. Title. Publication Statement (of original) Also getting into new territory for me, would the RDA Manuscript-related elements (RDA 3.9.2) apply for a single cataloged print-out of a published electronic resource? Production Method for Manuscript: printout On another note, related to another post, there seems to be no designator for the relationship element "Producer of an Unpublished Resource," even in the reconciled RDA-MARC-id.loc.gov list http://www.loc.gov/marc/annmarcrdarelators.html . In RDA, though, the top-level relationship elements are not repeated as designators. "Publisher" is an element, not a designator, whereas there is a more specific designator that falls under Publisher, "broadcaster." Thomas Brenndorfer Guelph Public Library ________________________________ From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Tarango, Adolfo [atara...@ucsd.edu] Sent: September-27-13 11:13 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] RDA local printouts Weighing in with trepidation to comment on the part of 2.8.1.3 addressing the appearance of publication data. Note, that 2.8.1.3 states a condition must be met, that when both publication data of the reproducer and the original are found on the item, then in that case, you record the data for the reproducer. The implication is that if the data for the reproducer isn't presented, then you use the data of the original. Just saying. Adolfo -----Original Message----- From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Brenndorfer, Thomas Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 1:13 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] RDA local printouts I would tie two RDA instructions together: RDA 1.1.2 "The term 'resource' is used in chapters 2-4 to refer to a manifestation or item." RDA 2.8.1.1 "A publication statement is a statement identifying the place or places of publication, publisher or publishers, and date or dates of publication of a resource." The manifestation in Chapter 2 is the actual physical object in hand, not the original, and so the publication statement, in refering to the manifestation, refers to that physical object. Elsewhere in RDA, 'resource' can refer to work, expression, manifestation, or item, but not in Chapter 2 where it is only applied to manifestations or items. In addition, there is 2.8.1.3 Facsimiles and Reproductions, which directs the use of a Related Manifestation element for the original publication statement: "When a facsimile or reproduction has a publication statement or statements relating to the original manifestation as well as to the facsimile or reproduction, record the publication statement or statements relating to the facsimile or reproduction. Record any publication statement relating to the original as a publication statement of a related manifestation." Thomas Brenndorfer Guelph Public Library ________________________________________ From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Adam L. Schiff [asch...@u.washington.edu] Sent: September-26-13 3:21 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA<mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA> Subject: Re: [RDA-L] RDA local printouts Mac, I was speculating about what one would do if adhering strictly to RDA. But I could be persuaded by Thomas Brenndorfer's argument that the publisher of the printout is the agency that printed it out. I would also be content with a decision to apply the provider-neutral guidelines in reverse and give the publisher of the online in the publication elements. But that would not be what RDA itself says to do. Adam On Thu, 26 Sep 2013, J. McRee Elrod wrote: > Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 10:38:59 -0700 > From: J. McRee Elrod <m...@slc.bc.ca<mailto:m...@slc.bc.ca>> > To: asch...@u.washington.edu<mailto:asch...@u.washington.edu> > Cc: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca<mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca> > Subject: Re: [RDA-L] RDA local printouts > > Adam said: > >> I think in RDA you would supply: >> >> 264 _1 [Place of publication not identified] : $b [publisher not > identified], $c [date of publication not identified] >> 264 _3 [Place of printing] : $b [place of printing], $c [date of > printing] > > But you DO know the place, publisher and date for the electronic > content. which remains the same in the printout. Who would benefit > from that erroneous space consuming 264 1? > > When changing print to electronic, the Provider Neutral Standard calls > for the original print publisher in 264 1. When changing electronic > to print, the same principle should apply; the electronic imprint > should carry over. They published it. The library is just printing > it. > > We very much approve of the PN standard abandoning the LCRI, and > describing what one has. The PN standard gets it right that the > publisher of the content belongs in imprint. (We add 264 2 for the > aggregator, but we seem to be alone in that. We would never > substitute the aggregator for the publisher, anymore than we would > substitute a printer for a publisher.) > > > __ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca<mailto:m...@slc.bc.ca>) > {__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/ > ___} |__ \__________________________________________________________ > > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Adam L. Schiff Principal Cataloger University of Washington Libraries Box 352900 Seattle, WA 98195-2900 (206) 543-8409 (206) 685-8782 fax asch...@u.washington.edu<mailto:asch...@u.washington.edu> http://faculty.washington.edu/~aschiff ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
