On 11/20/2013 5:05 PM, Jay Smith <jsm...@sfpl.org> wrote:

 > t.p. recto:  New York   t.p. verso  New York, NY  or perhaps New
 > York, New York, USA
 > t.p. recto:  New York   t.p. verso  Brooklyn, New York
 > t.p. recto:  San Francisco  t.p. verso Rohnert Park, CA
 > Quick and dirty LC practice (sorry, LC) seems to be to use the form
 > on the verso because it is "fuller" and perhaps because it is near
 > the copyright information.  I see no reason to do this if the title
 > is taken from the t.p. recto and the imprint is there.

We are not cataloging in RDA here yet, and maybe the results I'm about 
to describe are right according to a strict letter-reading of the rules, 
but it's always annoyed me to see Wadsworth/Cengage placed in Australia 
rather than Boston or Belmont, CA (or whatever is on the resource, they 
seem to publish from multiple places) or O'Reilly put in Beijing instead 
of Sebastopol, CA. Yes, Australia or Beijing are first in the string on 
the recto, but it's always seemed to me that it was simply 
alphabetization for looks, and not an actual statement about the 
country/city of publication. Have I been wrong in that?

Lisa Hatt
DeAnza College Library

Reply via email to