date:20130307

Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

2013-03-07 Thread Robert Maxwell

To repeat what Kevin said in a different way:

The one core relationship in RDA is to record the relationship between the 
resource being cataloged and the work manifested in it (see RDA 17.3). There 
are several ways to do this. One of the ways to do it is by using an authorized 
access point for the work (see 17.4.2.2). In current practice if there is only 
one work or expression manifested in the resource being cataloged, the 
authorized access point for the work is recorded in bibliographic 1XX + 240 (or 
130 if there is no principal creator). So in this case, the purpose of 1XX/240 
(or 7XX author-title) is to record the relationship of the resource being 
cataloged with the work contained in it, not to unite 
manifestations/works/expressions with different titles. In this case the title 
proper of the manifestation is evidently not the preferred title for the work, 
so the 1XX/240 is necessary to record the relationship between the resource and 
the work that is in it.

If the preferred title of the work (6.2.2) is exactly the same as the title 
proper of the manifestation (2.3.2), then the combination of 1XX + 245 subfield 
$a suffices to record the relationship between the resource and the work in the 
resource and 240 is not necessary. But that apparently isn't true in this case.

I confess I agree that 1XX/240 has always been a cockeyed way of doing this 
(RDA is no different from AACR2 on this coding) and I'd much rather we always 
coded the authorized access point for the work contained in the resource in 7XX 
(with second indicator 2), but unfortunately that isn't the current practice.

Bob

Robert L. Maxwell
Head, Special Collections and Formats Catalog Dept.
6728 Harold B. Lee Library
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
(801)422-5568 

"We should set an example for all the world, rather than confine ourselves to 
the course which has been heretofore pursued"--Eliza R. Snow, 1842.


-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: Thursday, March 07, 2013 2:40 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

Kevin said:

>In this case under discussion, there IS a difference between the 
>manifestation and the preferred title of the work, so 240 should be >
used.


The function of a 240 is to unite manifestions of works/expressions with 
differingn titles.  If this is the only manifestation, we would not use 240.

My attitude may be influenced by many of our clients' distaste for 240s (apart 
from Shealespeare and music), as not being on the item, so misleading in brief 
display when seen first rather than 245.


   __   __   J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
  {__  |   / Special Libraries Cataloguing   HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
  ___} |__ \__

Re: [RDA-L] (OCoLC)829311087

2013-03-07 Thread Deborah Fritz

Thomas said: "The basic problem is then thrown back to MARC where one has an
undifferentiated 710 field (corporate body could be a creator, other
associated with the work, contributor, publisher, etc. - none of these
top-level relationship elements are in the list of designators)."

 

"Creator", "Contributor", "Publisher", and other top-level elements are
actually in the list at http://www.loc.gov/marc/relators/relaterm.html

 

But "Other Person, Family or Corporate Body Associated with a Work" is not
there. 

 

However RDA appendix I.1 says: "If none of the terms listed in this appendix
is appropriate or sufficiently specific, use a term indicating the nature of
the relationship as concisely as possible." So if we can think of a more
specific term, we can use it in $e (notice that the MARC instructions for $e
do not mention the code list); the problem being, of course, that there will
be no corresponding $4 code, unless we can get our new term approved and
added to the list in I.1 and the MARC Code List for Relators.

 

As Thomas points out, if we do not add Relationship Designators, we have no
way of knowing what the relationships are in MARC, because the tag numbers
will not tell us about exact relationships.

 

Even though Relationship Designators are not RDA-Core, I believe that the
reason that they are not core is that the top-level relationship will always
be present as an element, and so that element label will be used to express
the relationship, if no more specific designator is provided. So, we should
make every attempt to add relationship designators in our MARC records, even
if they are just the top-level ones.

 

The one problem being that crazy long "Other Person, Family or Corporate
Body Associated with a Work" for which MARC has no entry. So this is where
we can invoke the permission to come up with our own term. I'm not going to
take a stab at a suggestion for this resource, however.

 

Deborah

 

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  

Deborah Fritz

TMQ, Inc.

  debo...@marcofquality.com

  www.marcofquality.com

 

From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Brenndorfer, Thomas
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 5:35 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] (OCoLC)829311087

 

In looking at the examples in RDA 19.3.1.3 for "Other Person, Family or
Corporate Body Associated with a Work" there are several instances where a
specific relationship designator is not in the initial phrasing for the
example.

 

So when one sees "Authorized access point representing the dedicatee for"
one can take that mean that the relationship designator "dedicatee" is used.

 

When one sees "Authorized access point representing the corporate body
associated with the work for" then no relationship designator is used.

 

The top-level elements for Work relationships are:

 

Creator

Other Person, Family or Corporate Body Associated with a Work

 

So if one can't see a match in the list of relationship designators in RDA
Appendix I.2.2 (for Others associated with a Work) then no relationship
designator is assigned. The basic problem is then thrown back to MARC where
one has an undifferentiated 710 field (corporate body could be a creator,
other associated with the work, contributor, publisher, etc. - none of these
top-level relationship elements are in the list of designators).

 

Thomas Brenndorfer

Guelph Public Library

 

 

 

From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Kevin M Randall
Sent: March-07-13 5:17 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] (OCoLC)829311087

 

I don't believe there is any relationship designator yet defined in RDA
appropriate for this particular relationship (and lots of others).  The
place this relationship fits into is I.2.2 (Relationship Designators for
Other Persons, Families, or Corporate Bodies Associated with a Work).  Not
much there that fits this!  The closest seem to be "host institution",
"Issuing body", and "sponsoring body", but none of them is really
appropriate.  I would just omit subfield $e, since it is not a required
element.

 

Kevin M. Randall

Principal Serials Cataloger

Northwestern University Library

k...@northwestern.edu

(847) 491-2939

 

Proudly wearing the sensible shoes since 1978!

 

From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Michael Borries
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 3:57 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: [RDA-L] (OCoLC)829311087

 

I come to the collective wisdom looking for guidance.

 

I have cataloged this record according to RDA standards (I hope!).  What
troubles me is the 710 for Polaroid Collections.  I have no idea what to use
for the subfield $e except perhaps "contributor," and that doesn't see

Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

2013-03-07 Thread Kevin M Randall

Mac Elrod wrote:

> Kevin said:
> 
> >In this case under discussion, there IS a difference between the
> >manifestation and the preferred title of the work, so 240 should be >
> used.
> 
> 
> The function of a 240 is to unite manifestions of works/expressions
> with differingn titles.  If this is the only manifestation, we would
> not use 240.
> 
> My attitude may be influenced by many of our clients' distaste for
> 240s (apart from Shealespeare and music), as not being on the item, so
> misleading in brief display when seen first rather than 245.

No, the function of the 240 (in RDA records) is to give the name of the work, 
if that name is different from the title proper in the 245 field.

The problem we have is that for the time being we're stuck with a data 
structure that was designed for printing catalog cards.  The technology of card 
catalogs is very, very different from entity-relationship modeling, which is 
the main way we conceive of data in bibliographic databases.  For filing 
purposes, MARC 245 is expected to be the "established" form of the title if:

- there is no 1XX field, OR
- there is a 1XX field but NOT a 240 field.

MARC 245 is expected to be just a variant access point if:

- there is a 1XX field, AND
- there is a 240 field.

There is no way that 245 can be BOTH the name of the work AND the title proper 
of the manifestation if there is a difference between the two.

Actually, I think we should consider ourselves lucky we've been able to keep 
MARC working as well as it does for us, seeing how much we're expecting the 
data to do, beyond what was expected close to half a century ago.

In order to have the data migrate cleanly to a format that's more RDA-friendly, 
the 240 field is essential in a case like this.  If your clients have 
"distaste" for the 240 field, I question how well they understand or care how 
bibliographic data works.

Kevin M. Randall
Principal Serials Cataloger
Northwestern University Library
k...@northwestern.edu
(847) 491-2939

Proudly wearing the sensible shoes since 1978!

Re: [RDA-L] (OCoLC)829311087

2013-03-07 Thread Brenndorfer, Thomas

In looking at the examples in RDA 19.3.1.3 for "Other Person, Family or 
Corporate Body Associated with a Work" there are several instances where a 
specific relationship designator is not in the initial phrasing for the example.

So when one sees "Authorized access point representing the dedicatee for" one 
can take that mean that the relationship designator "dedicatee" is used.

When one sees "Authorized access point representing the corporate body 
associated with the work for" then no relationship designator is used.

The top-level elements for Work relationships are:

Creator
Other Person, Family or Corporate Body Associated with a Work

So if one can't see a match in the list of relationship designators in RDA 
Appendix I.2.2 (for Others associated with a Work) then no relationship 
designator is assigned. The basic problem is then thrown back to MARC where one 
has an undifferentiated 710 field (corporate body could be a creator, other 
associated with the work, contributor, publisher, etc. - none of these 
top-level relationship elements are in the list of designators).

Thomas Brenndorfer
Guelph Public Library



From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Kevin M Randall
Sent: March-07-13 5:17 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] (OCoLC)829311087

I don't believe there is any relationship designator yet defined in RDA 
appropriate for this particular relationship (and lots of others).  The place 
this relationship fits into is I.2.2 (Relationship Designators for Other 
Persons, Families, or Corporate Bodies Associated with a Work).  Not much there 
that fits this!  The closest seem to be "host institution", "Issuing body", and 
"sponsoring body", but none of them is really appropriate.  I would just omit 
subfield $e, since it is not a required element.

Kevin M. Randall
Principal Serials Cataloger
Northwestern University Library
k...@northwestern.edu
(847) 491-2939

Proudly wearing the sensible shoes since 1978!

From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Michael Borries
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 3:57 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: [RDA-L] (OCoLC)829311087

I come to the collective wisdom looking for guidance.

I have cataloged this record according to RDA standards (I hope!).  What 
troubles me is the 710 for Polaroid Collections.  I have no idea what to use 
for the subfield $e except perhaps "contributor," and that doesn't seem 
correct.  The term "author" would seem to suggest that the Polaroid Collections 
should be the preferred entry, but this book does not seem to fall into any of 
the categories for corporate authorship.  I did use the subdivision "Catalogs" 
in one of the 610 fields, but this doesn't seem to be an "official" catalog, 
although all the illustrations are of photographs held by the Polaroid 
Collections, and Barbara Hitchcock is the director of the Collections.

Thoughts?  Any and all corrections also gratefully received, especially for the 
300 field.

Michael S. Borries
Cataloger, City University of New York
151 East 25th Street, 5th Floor
New York, NY  10010
Phone: (646) 312-1687
Email: michael.borr...@mail.cuny.edu

Re: [RDA-L] (OCoLC)829311087

2013-03-07 Thread Kevin M Randall

I don't believe there is any relationship designator yet defined in RDA 
appropriate for this particular relationship (and lots of others).  The place 
this relationship fits into is I.2.2 (Relationship Designators for Other 
Persons, Families, or Corporate Bodies Associated with a Work).  Not much there 
that fits this!  The closest seem to be "host institution", "Issuing body", and 
"sponsoring body", but none of them is really appropriate.  I would just omit 
subfield $e, since it is not a required element.

Kevin M. Randall
Principal Serials Cataloger
Northwestern University Library
k...@northwestern.edu
(847) 491-2939

Proudly wearing the sensible shoes since 1978!

From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Michael Borries
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 3:57 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: [RDA-L] (OCoLC)829311087

I come to the collective wisdom looking for guidance.

I have cataloged this record according to RDA standards (I hope!).  What 
troubles me is the 710 for Polaroid Collections.  I have no idea what to use 
for the subfield $e except perhaps "contributor," and that doesn't seem 
correct.  The term "author" would seem to suggest that the Polaroid Collections 
should be the preferred entry, but this book does not seem to fall into any of 
the categories for corporate authorship.  I did use the subdivision "Catalogs" 
in one of the 610 fields, but this doesn't seem to be an "official" catalog, 
although all the illustrations are of photographs held by the Polaroid 
Collections, and Barbara Hitchcock is the director of the Collections.

Thoughts?  Any and all corrections also gratefully received, especially for the 
300 field.

Michael S. Borries
Cataloger, City University of New York
151 East 25th Street, 5th Floor
New York, NY  10010
Phone: (646) 312-1687
Email: michael.borr...@mail.cuny.edu

Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

2013-03-07 Thread J. McRee Elrod

Kevin said:

>In this case under discussion, there IS a difference between the
>manifestation and the preferred title of the work, so 240 should be >
used.


The function of a 240 is to unite manifestions of works/expressions
with differingn titles.  If this is the only manifestation, we would
not use 240.

My attitude may be influenced by many of our clients' distaste for
240s (apart from Shealespeare and music), as not being on the item, so
misleading in brief display when seen first rather than 245.


   __   __   J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
  {__  |   / Special Libraries Cataloguing   HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
  ___} |__ \__

[RDA-L] (OCoLC)829311087

2013-03-07 Thread Michael Borries

I come to the collective wisdom looking for guidance.

I have cataloged this record according to RDA standards (I hope!).  What 
troubles me is the 710 for Polaroid Collections.  I have no idea what to use 
for the subfield $e except perhaps "contributor," and that doesn't seem 
correct.  The term "author" would seem to suggest that the Polaroid Collections 
should be the preferred entry, but this book does not seem to fall into any of 
the categories for corporate authorship.  I did use the subdivision "Catalogs" 
in one of the 610 fields, but this doesn't seem to be an "official" catalog, 
although all the illustrations are of photographs held by the Polaroid 
Collections, and Barbara Hitchcock is the director of the Collections.

Thoughts?  Any and all corrections also gratefully received, especially for the 
300 field.

Michael S. Borries
Cataloger, City University of New York
151 East 25th Street, 5th Floor
New York, NY  10010
Phone: (646) 312-1687
Email: michael.borr...@mail.cuny.edu

Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

2013-03-07 Thread Kevin M Randall

MARC field 245 is for identifying the *manifestation* (RDA 2.3).  You use what 
is found on the preferred source of the manifestation, typos and all.

You also need to identify the *work* (RDA 6.2).  In our current environment, 
for the "typical" book (including dissertations) that's going to have a 
creator's name as part of the access point, that means there must be a MARC 
field 240 for the preferred title, if it differs from the title of the 
manifestation.  The preferred title of the work can come from any source; it 
does not depend entirely on the sole manifestation.

In this case under discussion, there IS a difference between the manifestation 
and the preferred title of the work, so 240 should be used.

A note may also be given about the typo (RDA 2.20.2.4), but is not required.  
(Personally, I would give the note.)  Whether this is done via 246 or 500 could 
be debated.  246 is not really essential for access, since the correct form of 
the title will be in the 240.

Kevin M. Randall
Principal Serials Cataloger
Northwestern University Library
k...@northwestern.edu
(847) 491-2939

Proudly wearing the sensible shoes since 1978!

From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Jasmin Nof
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 2:37 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

Perhaps this is a silly question, but suppose the title were repeated elsewhere 
in the resource (say, t.p. verso), could that form be used and the typo-d form 
on the t.p. disregarded altogether (or referenced in a 246 with a $i indicating 
its source)?

Thanks, Jasmin

Jasmin Nof

Hebraica Cataloging Librarian

University of Pennsylvania

Van Pelt-Dietrich Library Center

3420 Walnut Street

Philadelphia, PA 19104-6206

T. 215-746-6397

F. 215-573-9610

j...@upenn.edu
On 3/7/2013 2:09 PM, Jack Wu wrote:
In Bib. Format & Standards, the section under field 246, 2nd Indicator blank, 
use for corrected forms of titles has an example for correction of 
mis-spelling, so it does not appear to me there is a problem here.
Even if it goes beyond the spelling out or not of a word, it's still a 
variation from the title, where no type is specified. I think putting sic, or 
equivalent English in brackets is also helpful in addition to the use of 246 
field. The suggestion to send the thesis back to be corrected and rebound 
confuses the keeper/recorder role of the librarian with creation and acceptance 
of the thesis.

Jack

Jack Wu
Franciscan University of Steubenville
j...@franciscan.edu

>>> Michael Cohen  
>>> 3/7/2013 6:49 AM >>>
RDA Exercise

A patron asked us to correct a typo in the title page of his
dissertation. The rules are quite clear
on how to handle this situation: transcribe the title page title in 245 and
record the corrected title in 246. But
246 is defined as Varying Form of Title, and a corrected typo is not a
variation of the real title in the same way that spelling out ‘and’ for &
is. Rather, isn’t the corrected (or
intended) title actually the title of the Work (instead of the Manifestation)
and therefore shouldn’t it be recorded in 240 instead of 246?

Please explain the flaws in this logic.

--

Michael L. Cohen
Interim Head of Cataloging
General Library System, University of Wisconsin-Madison
324C Memorial Library
728 State Street
Madison, WI 53706-1494
Phone: (608) 262-3246 Fax: (608) 262-4861
Email: mco...@library.wisc.edu

Scanned by for virus, malware and spam by SCM appliance

[RDA-L] Sic 'em! (was RE: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles)

2013-03-07 Thread Benjamin A Abrahamse

Not to continue to beat a horse I suspect is already dead, but "sic" is not the 
same type of Latin abbreviation as the "s.l." or "et al." of blessed recent 
memory.

In point of fact, it appears in most English dictionaries including Webster's 
and the OED, the latter of which defines it as, " A parenthetical insertion 
used in printing quotations or reported utterances to call attention to 
something anomalous or erroneous in the original, or to guard against the 
supposition of misquotation. "  Exactly the way it is used (was used) by 
catalogers.

Only once in my cataloging career have I been asked by a user about the 
presence of a "[sic]" in a record. And as it happened it wasn't that he didn't 
understand what it meant, it was that he disagreed that it was an error (one of 
those borderline cases of using a possessive apostrophe after a word that ends 
in a voiced sibilant.) All of which is to say while [sic] can be misused by 
overfussy catalogers, that in itself does not warrant getting rid of the 
practice altogether.

b


Benjamin Abrahamse
Cataloging Coordinator
Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems
MIT Libraries
617-253-7137

From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] On Behalf Of Ian Fairclough
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 2:42 PM
To: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

RDA-L readers,

Jenifer Marquardt asked "Why is the corrected version of any 245 with an error 
put in the MARC field 246 rather than in the 240?"

Field 240, Uniform Title, is always associated with a 1XX field.  If no 1XX 
field is present, the data is tagged 130.  Thus, field 240 is always an 
appendage to an *author* field, a name heading plus uniform title (in 
AACR2-speak), that is, a name-title entry (in more common parlance among 
catalogers). See http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd240.html  "Uniform 
title for an item when the bibliographic description is entered under a main 
entry field that contains a personal (field 100), corporate (110), or meeting 
(111) name."

Field 246, on the other hand, is a Varying Form of Title field: "Varying forms 
of the title appearing on different parts of an item or a portion of the title 
proper, or an alternative form of the title when the form differs substantially 
from the title statement in field 245 and if they contribute to the further 
identification of the item." http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd246.html

In terms of literary warrant: The corrected form of title often lacks it, in 
the sense that the title as transcribed, error and all, is the only existing 
warrant.  The cataloger is exercising judgment in providing a correction.  That 
is different from "establishing" the corrected title as a uniform title.  You 
really should have justification in a documentable source in order to do that.

RDA does not give instruction on using [sic] (in contrast to AACR2 1.0F1) and 
there are various reasons why doing so is a good/bad idea.  So no wonder we 
argue the case back and forth!  My favorite example is a compact disc sound 
recording with title "The Dutchess" (actually, the name of the artist).  That 
is not a typo, so it would not be appropriate to correct it.  You can however 
add [sic] to indicate that you haven't introduced a typo in your transcription, 
in case anyone should wonder.  But that has gone out of fashion, so to speak, 
along with use of other Latin abbreviations.  Personally, I dislike the phrase 
"Title should read".   Who are we catalogers to tell people how their creations 
"should" read?

I hope this helps.  Does it answer the question?  - Ian

Ian Fairclough - George Mason University - 
ifairclough43...@yahoo.com

Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

2013-03-07 Thread McRae, Rick

Not to dwell on this overmuch, but, in response to Ian's:

Field 240, Uniform Title, is always associated with a 1XX field.  If no 1XX 
field is present, the data is tagged 130.  Thus, field 240 is always an 
appendage to an *author* field, a name heading plus uniform title (in 
AACR2-speak), that is, a name-title entry (in more common parlance among 
catalogers). See http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd240.html  "Uniform 
title for an item when the bibliographic description is entered under a main 
entry field that contains a personal (field 100), corporate (110), or meeting 
(111) name."

In the dissertation case, the title is crucially connected to the 1xx field. 
(Why the author would be so recklessly remiss as to not proofread the 
title-page of his/her own thesis is another question entirely, outside the 
scope of our discussion). As stated before, I think we catalogers should have 
the ability to judge what the "correct" title is if the typo is obviously 
understood (e.g., "too" instead of "to" in grammatical context, but not "moose" 
for "goose") and record that as a 240 for the work title, keeping transcription 
(without [sic] in my opinion) in 245.

For such a standalone work as a dissertation, I wouldn't bother with creating a 
name-title record for this 100/240 in the authority file (unless the diss. were 
translated or made into an opera or comic book or something).

Now I'm grafting Jasmin's question into this message:
Perhaps this is a silly question, but suppose the title were repeated elsewhere 
in the resource (say, t.p. verso), could that form be used and the typo-d form 
on the t.p. disregarded altogether (or referenced in a 246 with a $i indicating 
its source)?

My vote: yes, by all means. Not a silly question-a plausible circumstance!

Thanks,
Rick McRae
Sibley Music Library
Eastman School of Music

Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

2013-03-07 Thread Jasmin Nof

Perhaps this is a silly question, but suppose the title were repeated 
elsewhere in the resource (say, t.p. verso), could that form be used and 
the typo-d form on the t.p. disregarded altogether (or referenced in a 
246 with a $i indicating its source)?


Thanks, Jasmin

Jasmin Nof
Hebraica Cataloging Librarian
University of Pennsylvania
Van Pelt-Dietrich Library Center
3420 Walnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19104-6206
T. 215-746-6397
F. 215-573-9610
j...@upenn.edu

On 3/7/2013 2:09 PM, Jack Wu wrote:
In Bib. Format & Standards, the section under field 246, 2nd Indicator 
blank, use for corrected forms of titles has an example for correction 
of mis-spelling, so it does not appear to me there is a problem here.
Even if it goes beyond the spelling out or not of a word, it's still a 
variation from the title, where no type is specified. I think putting 
sic, or equivalent English in brackets is also helpful in addition to 
the use of 246 field. The suggestion to send the thesis back to be 
corrected and rebound confuses the keeper/recorder role of the 
librarian with creation and acceptance of the thesis.

Jack
Jack Wu
Franciscan University of Steubenville
j...@franciscan.edu 


>>> Michael Cohen  3/7/2013 6:49 AM >>>
RDA Exercise




A patron asked us to correct a typo in the title page of his
dissertation. The rules are quite clear
on how to handle this situation: transcribe the title page title in 
245 and

record the corrected title in 246. But
246 is defined as Varying Form of Title, and a corrected typo is not a
variation of the real title in the same way that spelling out ‘and’ for &
is. Rather, isn’t the corrected (or
intended) title actually the title of the Work (instead of the 
Manifestation)

and therefore shouldn’t it be recorded in 240 instead of 246?



Please explain the flaws in this logic.

--

Michael L. Cohen
Interim Head of Cataloging
General Library System, University of Wisconsin-Madison
324C Memorial Library
728 State Street
Madison, WI 53706-1494
Phone: (608) 262-3246 Fax: (608) 262-4861
Email: mco...@library.wisc.edu


Scanned by for virus, malware and spam by SCM appliance

Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

2013-03-07 Thread Joan Wang

All I am saying is about a title with wrong spellings in a manifestation.
This is an issue derived from the mentioned thesis. I do not have any
offense on the solution of correcting the title through Graduate Office.
The thing also could happen in other cases in addition to a thesis. Does
that make sense?

Thanks,
Joan Wang
Illinois Heartland Library System

On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Lisa Hatt  wrote:

> On 3/7/2013 9:47 AM, Joan Wang  wrote:
>
> > This is a rule discussion derived from the issue. It is between
> > catalogers. No indication to quote the rule to the student.
>
> Might you not find this patron/student asking you to explain *why* you
> are refusing to make the requested correction and instead asking them to
> have the item reprinted first?
>
> --
> Lisa Hatt
> Cataloging
> De Anza College Library
> 408-864-8459

-- 
Zhonghong (Joan) Wang, Ph.D.
Cataloger -- CMC
Illinois Heartland Library System (Edwardsville Office)
6725 Goshen Road
Edwardsville, IL 62025
618.656.3216x409
618.656.9401Fax

Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

2013-03-07 Thread Ian Fairclough

RDA-L readers,


Jenifer Marquardt asked "Why is the corrected version of any 245 with an error 
put in the MARC field 246 rather than in the 240?"

Field 240, Uniform Title, is always associated with a 1XX field.  If no 1XX 
field is present, the data is tagged 130.  Thus, field 240 is always an 
appendage to an *author* field, a name heading plus uniform title (in 
AACR2-speak), that is, a name-title entry (in more common parlance among 
catalogers). See http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd240.html  "Uniform 
title for an item when the bibliographic description is entered under a 
main entry field that contains a personal (field 100), corporate (110), or 
meeting (111) name." 

Field 246, on the other hand, is a Varying Form of Title field: "Varying forms 
of the title appearing on different parts of an item or a 
portion of the title proper, or an alternative form of the title when the form 
differs substantially from the title statement in field 245 and if they 
contribute to the further identification of the item." 
http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd246.html


In terms of literary warrant: The corrected form of title often lacks it, in 
the sense that the title as transcribed, error and all, is the only existing 
warrant.  The cataloger is exercising judgment in providing a correction.  That 
is different from "establishing" the corrected title as a uniform title.  You 
really should have justification in a documentable source in order to do that.

RDA does not give instruction on using [sic] (in contrast to AACR2 1.0F1) and 
there are various reasons why doing so is a good/bad idea.  So no wonder we 
argue the case back and forth!  My favorite example is a compact disc sound 
recording with title "The Dutchess" (actually, the name of the artist).  That 
is not a typo, so it would not be appropriate to correct it.  You can however 
add [sic] to indicate that you haven't introduced a typo in your transcription, 
in case anyone should wonder.  But that has gone out of fashion, so to speak, 
along with use of other Latin abbreviations.  Personally, I dislike the phrase 
"Title should read".   Who are we catalogers to tell people how their creations 
"should" read?


I hope this helps.  Does it answer the question?  - Ian
 
Ian Fairclough - George Mason University - ifairclough43...@yahoo.com

Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

2013-03-07 Thread Arthur Liu

It seems to me there are two separate issues here.

The first has to do with letting the student/institution correct the title
and re-issue the resource.  That would happen outside the cataloging
process and RDA doesn't really come into play.  (I suppose technically this
would be a new manifestation, but that may be moot since the old
manifestation wouldn't exist anymore.)

The other issue is if you catalog the current manifestation with the typo
in the title proper.  I think it is possible to have all three fields:

1) You'd have a 245 where you transcribe the Title Proper of the
Manifestation as it appears, with the typo.

2) You'd also have a 246 where you can enter the Variant Title of the
Manifestation (which is the Title Proper of the Manifestation with the typo
corrected).

3) You *can* also have a 240 with the Preferred Title of the Work.  And the
title of the work *can* be identical in content to the Title Proper of the
Manifestation, or to a corrected version of it (a Variant Title of the
Manifestation).  But in FRBR world I think it is conceptually a different
element.

>> "But 246 is defined as Varying Form of Title, and a corrected typo is
not a variation of the real title in the same way that spelling out ‘and’
for & is," <<

When you say "real title" I think it is important to distinguish between
"real title of the manifestation" versus "real title of the work."  If
we're talking about manifestation, RDA defines "variant" title as including
corrected versions of titles (RDA 2.6.3.1. e)).  So by RDA's definition, a
corrected typo is a "variation" of the real title--of the manifestation.
 It is in the same category as spelling out "and" for ampersand.

Meanwhile, your Preferred Title of the Work may be identical in content to
either the Title Proper of the Manifestation or a corrected Variant of it.

As some have pointed out, in reality, if the 240 is going to be identical
in content to either the 245 or the 246, it is not typical to include the
240.  This might be driven by practical reasons: the 240 in this case may
be seen as unnecessary because it won't increase access, provide any
collocation, aid in selection, etc. (but it does increase workload).  But I
don't see why--at least from a theoretical standpoint--we couldn't have all
three (245, 246, 240) if we wanted to.  They are conceptually different
elements.  (I'll also note that Preferred Title of the Work is a core
element in RDA.)

>> "Rather, isn’t the corrected (or intended) title actually the title of
the Work (instead of the Manifestation) and therefore shouldn’t it be
recorded in 240 instead of 246?" <<

So I say, couldn't it be both?  Consider the case of a manifestation that
has a typo in the title proper *and* it just so happens that the work
embodied by this manifestation also has other expressions/manifestations
out there.  Wouldn't you have all three (245, 246, 240)?  The 245 would be
for the title proper with typo, the 246 would be for the corrected title
proper, and the 240 would be for the work title.  Here, the work title *
might* be identical to the 246, *or* it might be identical to a 245/246
from one of the *other *manifestations out there.

Arthur Liu
MLS Candidate
Simmons College

On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 1:29 PM, Benjamin A Abrahamse wrote:

>  Just looking at the question practically: wouldn't using a 240 instead
> of a 246--though perhaps "correct" from the standpoint of RDA--require more
> authority work? And, since most libraries index 130, 24x, and most of the
> 7xx fields together in their title index, would that work be worth the
> effort in terms of better user outcomes?
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> Benjamin Abrahamse
>
> Cataloging Coordinator
>
> Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems
>
> MIT Libraries
>
> 617-253-7137
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
> [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] *On Behalf Of *Gene Fieg
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 07, 2013 1:07 PM
> *To:* RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca
>
> *Subject:* Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles
>
>  ** **
>
> And this example is a reflection of orthographic reform.  Does it fit the
> question asked?
>
> On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 10:03 AM, McRae, Rick 
> wrote:
>
>
> I agree with Jenifer's favoring 240 over 246 for the proper form of title.
> In support, check out n  84105541 in OCLC NAF:
>
> 1001 Morley, Thomas, ǂd 1557-1603? ǂt Plaine and easie introduction to
> practicall musicke
> 4001 Morley, Thomas, ǂd 1557-1603? ǂt Plain and easy introduction to
> practical music
>
> Of course in Morley's time, the former title was considered proper
> spelling, and the title in the above 400 would have been considered riddled
> with typos. Any later edition reading "Plain and easy..." would be
> cataloged with the uniform, er, preferred title "Plaine and easie.." as a
> 240, not as a variant title.
> I see a similar analogy to the erroneous dissertation title we're
> discussing. T

Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

2013-03-07 Thread Lisa Hatt

On 3/7/2013 9:47 AM, Joan Wang  wrote:

> This is a rule discussion derived from the issue. It is between
> catalogers. No indication to quote the rule to the student.

Might you not find this patron/student asking you to explain *why* you 
are refusing to make the requested correction and instead asking them to 
have the item reprinted first?

-- 
Lisa Hatt
Cataloging
De Anza College Library
408-864-8459

[RDA-L] FW: [PCCLIST] Access points for treaties

2013-03-07 Thread Leonard, William

In case anyone has mentioned this in their training material .

Bill

Division du contenu ouvert  |  Open Content Division
819-994-6936
william.leon...@bac-lac.gc.ca
Bibliothèque et Archives Canada  |  Library and Archives Canada
Gatineau, Québec  K1A 0N4
Gouvernement du Canada  |  Government of Canada



From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:pccl...@listserv.loc.gov] On 
Behalf Of Beck, Melissa
Sent: March-06-13 5:26 PM
To: pccl...@listserv.loc.gov
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Access points for treaties

I heartily "third," and commend John for the substantial work he has done (and 
continues to do) in having this RDA instruction (amicably) revised.

Melissa

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:pccl...@listserv.loc.gov] On 
Behalf Of Richard Amelung
Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2013 2:21 PM
To: pccl...@listserv.loc.gov
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Access points for treaties

Dear all--
I heartily second John's request that these headings NOT be modified at this 
time.  At Saint Louis University Law Library we are currently holding on 
processing numerous historical treaties precisely because the headings that we 
would need to establish under RDA would offer unexpected, unrecognizable, and 
... more importantly ... user unfriendly results.

With all due respect to those who, with good intentions, crafted this section 
of RDA, AALL would like to offer some friendly amendments as John indicates.

Many thanks for your indulgence at this time.

Richard
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 3:36 PM, John Hostage 
mailto:host...@law.harvard.edu>> wrote:
I would like to enter a plea that access points for treaties not be changed to 
the form presently called for by RDA.  Law librarians find the instruction in 
RDA (access points starting with the first-named government, including for 
multilateral treaties) to be unacceptable.  The American Association of Law 
Libraries is working on a proposal to revise RDA to produce better outcomes for 
treaties.  This proposal will be submitted to ALA's CC:DA and hopefully 
forwarded to the Joint Steering Committee for RDA.  Meanwhile, existing 
authority records probably can't be changed by machine processes, and it would 
be nice if NACO members avoided changing them manually until this is settled.

Thank you.

--
John Hostage
Authorities and Database Integrity Librarian
Harvard Library--Information and Technical Services
Langdell Hall 194
Cambridge, MA 02138
host...@law.harvard.edu
+(1)(617) 495-3974 (voice)
+(1)(617) 496-4409 (fax)




--
Richard C. Amelung, Ph. D.
Professor of Legal Research
Associate Director, Law Library
Saint Louis University School of Law
Tel.: 314-977-2743
Fax: 314-977-3966

Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

2013-03-07 Thread Jack Wu

In Bib. Format & Standards, the section under field 246, 2nd Indicator
blank, use for corrected forms of titles has an example for correction
of mis-spelling, so it does not appear to me there is a problem here. 
Even if it goes beyond the spelling out or not of a word, it's still a
variation from the title, where no type is specified. I think putting
sic, or equivalent English in brackets is also helpful in addition to
the use of 246 field. The suggestion to send the thesis back to be
corrected and rebound confuses the keeper/recorder role of the librarian
with creation and acceptance of the thesis.
 
Jack
 
Jack Wu
Franciscan University of Steubenville
j...@franciscan.edu
 
 

>>> Michael Cohen  3/7/2013 6:49 AM >>>
RDA Exercise




A patron asked us to correct a typo in the title page of his
dissertation. The rules are quite clear
on how to handle this situation: transcribe the title page title in 245
and
record the corrected title in 246. But
246 is defined as Varying Form of Title, and a corrected typo is not a
variation of the real title in the same way that spelling out ‘and’ for
&
is. Rather, isn’t the corrected (or
intended) title actually the title of the Work (instead of the
Manifestation)
and therefore shouldn’t it be recorded in 240 instead of 246?



Please explain the flaws in this logic. 

--

Michael L. Cohen
Interim Head of Cataloging
General Library System, University of Wisconsin-Madison 
324C Memorial Library 
728 State Street
Madison, WI 53706-1494
Phone: (608) 262-3246 Fax: (608) 262-4861
Email: mco...@library.wisc.edu


Scanned by for virus, malware and spam by SCM appliance

Re: [RDA-L] Mss. cataloging question

2013-03-07 Thread J. McRee Elrod

Rita asked:

>What is the term for quires not yet bound or separated from a volume 
>over time?

If we are describing the original item with a note of what the cleint
has from it, "volume".  If we are describing just what they have,
"sheet".  


   __   __   J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
  {__  |   / Special Libraries Cataloguing   HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
  ___} |__ \__

Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

2013-03-07 Thread J. McRee Elrod

Jenifer asked:

>Why is the corrected version of any 245 with an error put in the MARC
>field 246 rather than in the 240?

There is one very practical reason.  All of our clients index 246.  
Many do not index 240 because of the useless ones for indexes (e.g.,
"Works ...").  Some clients ask that distinctive 240s be made 730s for
that reason, as well as not wanting something not on the item in brief
display.

For us, many RDA provisions reflect a lack of direct experience of
library needs we get from client feedback.


   __   __   J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
  {__  |   / Special Libraries Cataloguing   HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
  ___} |__ \__

Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

2013-03-07 Thread J. McRee Elrod

Ben said:

>I still don't understand why the JSC saw fit to get rid of the
>device, "[sic]" ,for bringing attention to known typos or other
>minor mistakes in the title.  I think most users understand what it
>means, even the ones who don't know Latin.

Ben, I agree with you absolutely that removing the practice of
correcting in situ was a mistake, but I think the reason is simple.  
RDA envisions harvesting data and using it as found, thus the
acceptance of strange capitalization.

I don't get it.  It is more labour intensive to work around this
lacuna than to apply it.

If we do move to dispersed data collected from the cloud, the form of
the transcribed title will be outside our control.  I don't look
forward to that day.

Some clients spell check their records, and ask for corrections, even
when the alternate spelling to which they object is on the title page.  
Having that "[sic]" tells us whether to do a 246 or change the 245.  
As outsourcers we can't go pull the item off the shelf to check.  We
may have to start asking for scans before we "correct" a 245.


   __   __   J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
  {__  |   / Special Libraries Cataloguing   HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
  ___} |__ \__

Re: [RDA-L] Mss. cataloging question

2013-03-07 Thread Maria Oldal



You might also consider using form and genre terms in 655. AAT has both "unbound" and "gatherings (gathered matter components)" available for use. They could even be combined. I'm well aware that the current generation of systems do not handle faceting particularly well, but it is useful to have controlled terms expressing a more specific carrier type with future applications in mind.
 
Maria Oldal
Head of Cataloging and Database Maintenance
The Morgan Library & Museum
old...@themorgan.org>>> JOHN C ATTIG  3/7/2013 12:24 PM >>>

The RDA definition of volume requires that the sheets be "bound or fastened together".  If you do not believe that this applies, then I would use "sheet" as the carrier type.  I would probably describe the extent in terms of leaves or pages, and I would definitely make a note describing the unbound quires.John AttigAuthority Control LibrarianPenn State Universityjx...@psu.edu


From: "Rita Lifton" To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CASent: Thursday, March 7, 2013 11:17:32 AMSubject: [RDA-L] Mss. cataloging question



Where in RDA would I find the following information:
 
I have a question about the carrier term for unbound quires or fragments of manuscripts. A codex=a volume; a sheet=leaves as letters, documents, loose leaves from a volume. What is the term for quires not yet bound or separated from a volume over time?
 

Thanks, 
Rita Lifton
The Library of The Jewish Theological Seminary

Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

2013-03-07 Thread Benjamin A Abrahamse

Just looking at the question practically: wouldn't using a 240 instead of a 
246--though perhaps "correct" from the standpoint of RDA--require more 
authority work? And, since most libraries index 130, 24x, and most of the 7xx 
fields together in their title index, would that work be worth the effort in 
terms of better user outcomes?


Benjamin Abrahamse
Cataloging Coordinator
Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems
MIT Libraries
617-253-7137

From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] On Behalf Of Gene Fieg
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 1:07 PM
To: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

And this example is a reflection of orthographic reform.  Does it fit the 
question asked?
On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 10:03 AM, McRae, Rick 
mailto:rmc...@esm.rochester.edu>> wrote:

I agree with Jenifer's favoring 240 over 246 for the proper form of title.
In support, check out n  84105541 in OCLC NAF:

1001 Morley, Thomas, ǂd 1557-1603? ǂt Plaine and easie introduction to 
practicall musicke
4001 Morley, Thomas, ǂd 1557-1603? ǂt Plain and easy introduction to practical 
music

Of course in Morley's time, the former title was considered proper spelling, 
and the title in the above 400 would have been considered riddled with typos. 
Any later edition reading "Plain and easy..." would be cataloged with the 
uniform, er, preferred title "Plaine and easie.." as a 240, not as a variant 
title.
I see a similar analogy to the erroneous dissertation title we're discussing. 
The work originally intended by the creator would have had the properly spelled 
title.
Practically, I side with Angelina (and reinforced by others) that if a 
corrected title can be replaced by Student or Grad Office prior to cataloging, 
that would be best. But if not, then I'd opt for the 240 solution-- but not 
246, for the reasons that others have argued.


Rick McRae
Catalog / Reference Librarian
Sibley Music Library
Eastman School of Music
(585) 274-1370




-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On 
Behalf Of Jenifer K Marquardt
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 12:50 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

Hello, everyone.

What about the basic question that was asked?  Why is the corrected version of 
any 245 with an error put in the MARC field 246 rather than in the 240?  The 
246 represents varying forms of the title, yes, but the title of the work is 
really the corrected version, isn't it?  And so then it would seem that the 240 
would be the place to record the corrected version.  This is a question that 
would apply to any title with an error, not just this thesis example.  Does 
anybody know why the 246 is used instead of the 240?

Thanks,

Jenifer

Jenifer K. Marquardt
Asst. Head of Cataloging & Authorities Librarian University of Georgia Athens, 
GA 30602-1641


From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] on behalf 
of Jerri Swinehart [swine...@oakland.edu]
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 12:40 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

I think though that what needs to guide catalogers in this case is that the 
student who wrote the dissertation is asking for a typo correction. The rest of 
the equation such as a (sic) or a 246 is only valid as long as the student 
doesn't find the typo important. In this case the student does so I would let 
the student have the dissertation, recommend that he/she go to the "Grad 
office" for help. When the dissertation made its way back to me then I would 
catalog it.

Remember, cataloging also involves public service, which by quoting cataloging 
rules to a student who does not know them, is  not being served here.

Sorry ... I will always disagree with the oh well crowd.

Thank you.

Jerri Swinehart
MLIS
Library Technician III
Metadata Technician
Oakland University
Kresge Library
Technical Services
Rochester, MI 48309-4484
swine...@oakland.edu>



--
Gene Fieg
Cataloger/Serials Librarian
Claremont School of Theology
gf...@cst.edu

Claremont School of Theology and Claremont Lincoln University do not represent 
or endorse the accuracy or reliability of any of the information or content 
contained in this forwarded email.  The forwarded email is that of the original 
sender and does not represent the views of Claremont School of Theology or 
Claremont Lincoln University.  It has been forwarded as a courtesy for 
information only.

Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

2013-03-07 Thread James Weinheimer

On 07/03/2013 18:49, Jenifer K Marquardt wrote:

> Hello, everyone.
>
> What about the basic question that was asked?  Why is the corrected version 
> of any 245 with an error put in the MARC field 246 rather than in the 240?  
> The 246 represents varying forms of the title, yes, but the title of the work 
> is really the corrected version, isn't it?  And so then it would seem that 
> the 240 would be the place to record the corrected version.  This is a 
> question that would apply to any title with an error, not just this thesis 
> example.  Does anybody know why the 246 is used instead of the 240?

The purpose of the uniform title is to bring together the same work when
the titles vary. It is an organizing device. Therefore, the title on the
physical piece may be "The tragicall story of Hamlet, prince of Denmark"
but the uniform title ensures that people do not have to search under
"T" to find "Hamlet".

The corrected title is simply that: it ensures that someone does not
have to look under a typographical error to find an item. So, following
the example above, if the title appeared as "The tregicall story of
Hamlet..." there would be a corrected title and a uniform title.

If an item comes out in only a single edition (or manifestation), there
is no need for a 240. Naturally, this practice may be going overboard
with RDA and FRBR since now everything supposedly has work, expression,
manifestation and item qualities.

-- 
*James Weinheimer* weinheimer.ji...@gmail.com
*First Thus* http://catalogingmatters.blogspot.com/
*Cooperative Cataloging Rules*
http://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/
*Cataloging Matters Podcasts*
http://blog.jweinheimer.net/p/cataloging-matters-podcasts.html

Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

2013-03-07 Thread McRae, Rick

If, hypothetically, a pre-orthographic reform edition had published using the 
post-orthographic reform spelling, it does indeed fit the question asked.
Rick

From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Gene Fieg
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 1:07 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

And this example is a reflection of orthographic reform.  Does it fit the 
question asked?
On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 10:03 AM, McRae, Rick 
mailto:rmc...@esm.rochester.edu>> wrote:

I agree with Jenifer's favoring 240 over 246 for the proper form of title.
In support, check out n  84105541 in OCLC NAF:

1001 Morley, Thomas, ǂd 1557-1603? ǂt Plaine and easie introduction to 
practicall musicke
4001 Morley, Thomas, ǂd 1557-1603? ǂt Plain and easy introduction to practical 
music

Of course in Morley's time, the former title was considered proper spelling, 
and the title in the above 400 would have been considered riddled with typos. 
Any later edition reading "Plain and easy..." would be cataloged with the 
uniform, er, preferred title "Plaine and easie.." as a 240, not as a variant 
title.
I see a similar analogy to the erroneous dissertation title we're discussing. 
The work originally intended by the creator would have had the properly spelled 
title.
Practically, I side with Angelina (and reinforced by others) that if a 
corrected title can be replaced by Student or Grad Office prior to cataloging, 
that would be best. But if not, then I'd opt for the 240 solution-- but not 
246, for the reasons that others have argued.

Rick McRae
Catalog / Reference Librarian
Sibley Music Library
Eastman School of Music
(585) 274-1370

-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On 
Behalf Of Jenifer K Marquardt
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 12:50 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

Hello, everyone.

What about the basic question that was asked?  Why is the corrected version of 
any 245 with an error put in the MARC field 246 rather than in the 240?  The 
246 represents varying forms of the title, yes, but the title of the work is 
really the corrected version, isn't it?  And so then it would seem that the 240 
would be the place to record the corrected version.  This is a question that 
would apply to any title with an error, not just this thesis example.  Does 
anybody know why the 246 is used instead of the 240?

Thanks,

Jenifer

Jenifer K. Marquardt
Asst. Head of Cataloging & Authorities Librarian University of Georgia Athens, 
GA 30602-1641

From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] on behalf 
of Jerri Swinehart [swine...@oakland.edu]
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 12:40 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

I think though that what needs to guide catalogers in this case is that the 
student who wrote the dissertation is asking for a typo correction. The rest of 
the equation such as a (sic) or a 246 is only valid as long as the student 
doesn't find the typo important. In this case the student does so I would let 
the student have the dissertation, recommend that he/she go to the "Grad 
office" for help. When the dissertation made its way back to me then I would 
catalog it.

Remember, cataloging also involves public service, which by quoting cataloging 
rules to a student who does not know them, is  not being served here.

Sorry ... I will always disagree with the oh well crowd.

Thank you.

Jerri Swinehart
MLIS
Library Technician III
Metadata Technician
Oakland University
Kresge Library
Technical Services
Rochester, MI 48309-4484
swine...@oakland.edu>

--
Gene Fieg
Cataloger/Serials Librarian
Claremont School of Theology
gf...@cst.edu

Claremont School of Theology and Claremont Lincoln University do not represent 
or endorse the accuracy or reliability of any of the information or content 
contained in this forwarded email.  The forwarded email is that of the original 
sender and does not represent the views of Claremont School of Theology or 
Claremont Lincoln University.  It has been forwarded as a courtesy for 
information only.

Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

2013-03-07 Thread Gene Fieg

And this example is a reflection of orthographic reform.  Does it fit the
question asked?

On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 10:03 AM, McRae, Rick wrote:

>
> I agree with Jenifer's favoring 240 over 246 for the proper form of title.
> In support, check out n  84105541 in OCLC NAF:
>
> 1001 Morley, Thomas, ǂd 1557-1603? ǂt Plaine and easie introduction to
> practicall musicke
> 4001 Morley, Thomas, ǂd 1557-1603? ǂt Plain and easy introduction to
> practical music
>
> Of course in Morley's time, the former title was considered proper
> spelling, and the title in the above 400 would have been considered riddled
> with typos. Any later edition reading "Plain and easy..." would be
> cataloged with the uniform, er, preferred title "Plaine and easie.." as a
> 240, not as a variant title.
> I see a similar analogy to the erroneous dissertation title we're
> discussing. The work originally intended by the creator would have had the
> properly spelled title.
> Practically, I side with Angelina (and reinforced by others) that if a
> corrected title can be replaced by Student or Grad Office prior to
> cataloging, that would be best. But if not, then I'd opt for the 240
> solution-- but not 246, for the reasons that others have argued.
>
>
> Rick McRae
> Catalog / Reference Librarian
> Sibley Music Library
> Eastman School of Music
> (585) 274-1370
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
> [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Jenifer K Marquardt
> Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 12:50 PM
> To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
> Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles
>
> Hello, everyone.
>
> What about the basic question that was asked?  Why is the corrected
> version of any 245 with an error put in the MARC field 246 rather than in
> the 240?  The 246 represents varying forms of the title, yes, but the title
> of the work is really the corrected version, isn't it?  And so then it
> would seem that the 240 would be the place to record the corrected version.
>  This is a question that would apply to any title with an error, not just
> this thesis example.  Does anybody know why the 246 is used instead of the
> 240?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jenifer
>
> Jenifer K. Marquardt
> Asst. Head of Cataloging & Authorities Librarian University of Georgia
> Athens, GA 30602-1641
>
> 
> From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [
> RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] on behalf of Jerri Swinehart [
> swine...@oakland.edu]
> Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 12:40 PM
> To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
> Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles
>
> I think though that what needs to guide catalogers in this case is that
> the student who wrote the dissertation is asking for a typo correction. The
> rest of the equation such as a (sic) or a 246 is only valid as long as the
> student doesn't find the typo important. In this case the student does so I
> would let the student have the dissertation, recommend that he/she go to
> the "Grad office" for help. When the dissertation made its way back to me
> then I would catalog it.
>
> Remember, cataloging also involves public service, which by quoting
> cataloging rules to a student who does not know them, is  not being served
> here.
>
> Sorry ... I will always disagree with the oh well crowd.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Jerri Swinehart
> MLIS
> Library Technician III
> Metadata Technician
> Oakland University
> Kresge Library
> Technical Services
> Rochester, MI 48309-4484
> swine...@oakland.edu
>



-- 
Gene Fieg
Cataloger/Serials Librarian
Claremont School of Theology
gf...@cst.edu

Claremont School of Theology and Claremont Lincoln University do not
represent or endorse the accuracy or reliability of any of the information
or content contained in this forwarded email.  The forwarded email is that
of the original sender and does not represent the views of Claremont School
of Theology or Claremont Lincoln University.  It has been forwarded as a
courtesy for information only.

Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

2013-03-07 Thread McRae, Rick


I agree with Jenifer's favoring 240 over 246 for the proper form of title.
In support, check out n  84105541 in OCLC NAF:

1001 Morley, Thomas, ǂd 1557-1603? ǂt Plaine and easie introduction to 
practicall musicke
4001 Morley, Thomas, ǂd 1557-1603? ǂt Plain and easy introduction to practical 
music

Of course in Morley's time, the former title was considered proper spelling, 
and the title in the above 400 would have been considered riddled with typos. 
Any later edition reading "Plain and easy..." would be cataloged with the 
uniform, er, preferred title "Plaine and easie.." as a 240, not as a variant 
title.
I see a similar analogy to the erroneous dissertation title we're discussing. 
The work originally intended by the creator would have had the properly spelled 
title.
Practically, I side with Angelina (and reinforced by others) that if a 
corrected title can be replaced by Student or Grad Office prior to cataloging, 
that would be best. But if not, then I'd opt for the 240 solution-- but not 
246, for the reasons that others have argued. 


Rick McRae
Catalog / Reference Librarian
Sibley Music Library
Eastman School of Music
(585) 274-1370




-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Jenifer K Marquardt
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 12:50 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

Hello, everyone.

What about the basic question that was asked?  Why is the corrected version of 
any 245 with an error put in the MARC field 246 rather than in the 240?  The 
246 represents varying forms of the title, yes, but the title of the work is 
really the corrected version, isn't it?  And so then it would seem that the 240 
would be the place to record the corrected version.  This is a question that 
would apply to any title with an error, not just this thesis example.  Does 
anybody know why the 246 is used instead of the 240?

Thanks,

Jenifer

Jenifer K. Marquardt
Asst. Head of Cataloging & Authorities Librarian University of Georgia Athens, 
GA 30602-1641


From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] on behalf of Jerri Swinehart 
[swine...@oakland.edu]
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 12:40 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

I think though that what needs to guide catalogers in this case is that the 
student who wrote the dissertation is asking for a typo correction. The rest of 
the equation such as a (sic) or a 246 is only valid as long as the student 
doesn't find the typo important. In this case the student does so I would let 
the student have the dissertation, recommend that he/she go to the "Grad 
office" for help. When the dissertation made its way back to me then I would 
catalog it.

Remember, cataloging also involves public service, which by quoting cataloging 
rules to a student who does not know them, is  not being served here.

Sorry ... I will always disagree with the oh well crowd.

Thank you.

Jerri Swinehart
MLIS
Library Technician III
Metadata Technician
Oakland University
Kresge Library
Technical Services
Rochester, MI 48309-4484
swine...@oakland.edu

Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

2013-03-07 Thread Jenifer K Marquardt

Hello, everyone.

What about the basic question that was asked?  Why is the corrected version of 
any 245 with an error put in the MARC field 246 rather than in the 240?  The 
246 represents varying forms of the title, yes, but the title of the work is 
really the corrected version, isn't it?  And so then it would seem that the 240 
would be the place to record the corrected version.  This is a question that 
would apply to any title with an error, not just this thesis example.  Does 
anybody know why the 246 is used instead of the 240?

Thanks,

Jenifer

Jenifer K. Marquardt
Asst. Head of Cataloging & Authorities Librarian
University of Georgia
Athens, GA 30602-1641


From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] on behalf of Jerri Swinehart 
[swine...@oakland.edu]
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 12:40 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

I think though that what needs to guide catalogers in this case is that the 
student who wrote the dissertation is asking for a typo correction. The rest of 
the equation such as a (sic) or a 246 is only valid as long as the student 
doesn't find the typo important. In this case the student does so I would let 
the student have the dissertation, recommend that he/she go to the "Grad 
office" for help. When the dissertation made its way back to me then I would 
catalog it.

Remember, cataloging also involves public service, which by quoting cataloging 
rules to a student who does not know them, is  not being served here.

Sorry ... I will always disagree with the oh well crowd.

Thank you.

Jerri Swinehart
MLIS
Library Technician III
Metadata Technician
Oakland University
Kresge Library
Technical Services
Rochester, MI 48309-4484
swine...@oakland.edu

Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

2013-03-07 Thread Joan Wang

This is a rule discussion derived from the issue. It is between catalogers.
No indication to quote the rule to the student.

Thanks,
Joan Wang
Illinois Heartland Library System

On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Jerri Swinehart wrote:

> I think though that what needs to guide catalogers in this case is that
> the student who wrote the dissertation is asking for a typo correction. The
> rest of the equation such as a (sic) or a 246 is only valid as long as the
> student doesn't find the typo important. In this case the student does so I
> would let the student have the dissertation, recommend that he/she go to
> the "Grad office" for help. When the dissertation made its way back to me
> then I would catalog it.
>
> Remember, cataloging also involves public service, which by quoting
> cataloging rules to a student who does not know them, is  not being served
> here.
>
> Sorry ... I will always disagree with the oh well crowd.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Jerri Swinehart
> MLIS
> Library Technician III
> Metadata Technician
> Oakland University
> Kresge Library
> Technical Services
> Rochester, MI 48309-4484
> swine...@oakland.edu
>
>
>



-- 
Zhonghong (Joan) Wang, Ph.D.
Cataloger -- CMC
Illinois Heartland Library System (Edwardsville Office)
6725 Goshen Road
Edwardsville, IL 62025
618.656.3216x409
618.656.9401Fax

Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

2013-03-07 Thread Jerri Swinehart

I think though that what needs to guide catalogers in this case is that the
student who wrote the dissertation is asking for a typo correction. The
rest of the equation such as a (sic) or a 246 is only valid as long as the
student doesn't find the typo important. In this case the student does so I
would let the student have the dissertation, recommend that he/she go to
the "Grad office" for help. When the dissertation made its way back to me
then I would catalog it.

Remember, cataloging also involves public service, which by quoting
cataloging rules to a student who does not know them, is  not being served
here.

Sorry ... I will always disagree with the oh well crowd.

Thank you.

Jerri Swinehart
MLIS
Library Technician III
Metadata Technician
Oakland University
Kresge Library
Technical Services
Rochester, MI 48309-4484
swine...@oakland.edu

Re: [RDA-L] Mss. cataloging question

2013-03-07 Thread JOHN C ATTIG

The RDA definition of volume requires that the sheets be "bound or fastened 
together". If you do not believe that this applies, then I would use "sheet" as 
the carrier type. I would probably describe the extent in terms of leaves or 
pages, and I would definitely make a note describing the unbound quires. 

John Attig 
Authority Control Librarian 
Penn State University 
jx...@psu.edu 

- Original Message -

| From: "Rita Lifton" 
| To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
| Sent: Thursday, March 7, 2013 11:17:32 AM
| Subject: [RDA-L] Mss. cataloging question

| Where in RDA would I find the following information :

| I have a question about the car rier term for unbound quires or
| fragments of manuscripts. A codex=a volume; a sheet=leaves as
| letters, documents, loose leaves from a volume. What is the term for
| quires not yet bound or separated from a volume over time?

| Thanks,
| Rita Lifton
| The Library of The Jewish Theological Seminary

Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

2013-03-07 Thread Benjamin A Abrahamse

I understand why RDA thinks it needs to go.

But a "principle" is not a law of nature. And for that matter, RDA states 
representation means, "data describing a resource should reflect".  I think 
there are cases, well understood by catalogers, where we can say, "Well it 
should, but in this case I can better fulfill users' needs by overriding this 
principle."  Even RDA admits, in 0.4.1: "trade-offs sometimes have to be made 
between one principle and another."

We can always use an added title to provide access to the correct version of 
the title, so it's not a matter of losing or gaining access via title indexes.  
The use of [sic] is a well-know practice, used beyond the domain of cataloging, 
for precisely indicating there is an error in the original, and it's right here 
to the left of the [sic].

In my opinion this is an example of RDA-inspired theory overriding the long 
tradition of practical, common sense in cataloging.

--Ben

Benjamin Abrahamse
Cataloging Coordinator
Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems
MIT Libraries
617-253-7137

From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] On Behalf Of Joan Wang
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 11:55 AM
To: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

RDA follows the representation principle. The data describing a resource should 
reflect the resource's representation of itself. The current way seems to be 
more
explicit.

Thanks,
Joan Wang
Illinois Heartland Library System
On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 10:48 AM, Benjamin A Abrahamse 
mailto:babra...@mit.edu>> wrote:
I still don't understand why the JSC saw fit to get rid of the device, "[sic]" 
,for bringing gattention to known typos or other minor mistakes in the title.  
I think most users understand what it means, even the ones who don't know Latin.

--Ben

Benjamin Abrahamse
Cataloging Coordinator
Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems
MIT Libraries
617-253-7137

From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] On 
Behalf Of Gene Fieg
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 11:44 AM
To: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

As far as I understand it, you transcribe what you see.
Just had one of those.  Title was Upnashads.  The record also had a 246.  The 
whole point of a catalog is get the patron to the work he/she wants or is 
seeking, or may find while doing a browse by title on the computer.
Do we want to help the patron or not?
RDA cannot be a cataloging code for catalogers.  It has to be a means to an 
end: "Gee, I am glad I found this.  Thanks."
On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 3:49 AM, Michael Cohen 
mailto:mco...@library.wisc.edu>> wrote:
RDA Exercise




A patron asked us to correct a typo in the title page of his
dissertation. The rules are quite clear
on how to handle this situation: transcribe the title page title in 245 and
record the corrected title in 246. But
246 is defined as Varying Form of Title, and a corrected typo is not a
variation of the real title in the same way that spelling out 'and' for &
is. Rather, isn't the corrected (or
intended) title actually the title of the Work (instead of the Manifestation)
and therefore shouldn't it be recorded in 240 instead of 246?



 Please explain the flaws in this logic.

--

Michael L. Cohen
Interim Head of Cataloging
General Library System, University of Wisconsin-Madison
324C Memorial Library
728 State Street
Madison, WI 53706-1494
Phone: (608) 262-3246 Fax: (608) 
262-4861
Email: mco...@library.wisc.edu



--
Gene Fieg
Cataloger/Serials Librarian
Claremont School of Theology
gf...@cst.edu

Claremont School of Theology and Claremont Lincoln University do not represent 
or endorse the accuracy or reliability of any of the information or content 
contained in this forwarded email.  The forwarded email is that of the original 
sender and does not represent the views of Claremont School of Theology or 
Claremont Lincoln University.  It has been forwarded as a courtesy for 
information only.



--
Zhonghong (Joan) Wang, Ph.D.
Cataloger -- CMC
Illinois Heartland Library System (Edwardsville Office)
6725 Goshen Road
Edwardsville, IL 62025
618.656.3216x409
618.656.9401Fax

Re: [RDA-L] Mss. cataloging question

2013-03-07 Thread Peter Schouten

To my knowledge, if you make analytical descriptions, you would choose sheets 
for unbound quires and volumes for any type of binding (compare RDA 3.4.1.12). 
In comprehensive descriptions the complete Manifestation should be the basis 
for the carrier term (and on item level: incomplete). I have not found more 
specific information.

Peter



Van: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] namens Rita Lifton [rilif...@jtsa.edu]
Verzonden: donderdag 7 maart 2013 17:17
Aan: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Onderwerp: [RDA-L] Mss. cataloging question

Where in RDA would I find the following information:

I have a question about the carrier term for unbound quires or fragments of 
manuscripts. A codex=a volume; a sheet=leaves as letters, documents, loose 
leaves from a volume. What is the term for quires not yet bound or separated 
from a volume over time?

Thanks,
Rita Lifton
The Library of The Jewish Theological Seminary

Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

2013-03-07 Thread Joan Wang

RDA follows the representation principle. The data describing a resource
should reflect the resource's representation of itself. The current way
seems to be more
explicit.

Thanks,
Joan Wang
Illinois Heartland Library System

On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 10:48 AM, Benjamin A Abrahamse wrote:

>  I still don't understand why the JSC saw fit to get rid of the device,
> "[sic]" ,for bringing gattention to known typos or other minor mistakes in
> the title.  I think most users understand what it means, even the ones who
> don't know Latin.  
>
> ** **
>
> --Ben
>
> ** **
>
> Benjamin Abrahamse
>
> Cataloging Coordinator
>
> Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems
>
> MIT Libraries
>
> 617-253-7137
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
> [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] *On Behalf Of *Gene Fieg
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 07, 2013 11:44 AM
> *To:* RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca
> *Subject:* Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles
>
> ** **
>
> As far as I understand it, you transcribe what you see.
>
> Just had one of those.  Title was Upnashads.  The record also had a 246.
> The whole point of a catalog is get the patron to the work he/she wants or
> is seeking, or may find while doing a browse by title on the computer.
>
> Do we want to help the patron or not?
>
> RDA cannot be a cataloging code for catalogers.  It has to be a means to
> an end: "Gee, I am glad I found this.  Thanks."
>
> On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 3:49 AM, Michael Cohen 
> wrote:
>
> RDA Exercise
>
>
>
>
> A patron asked us to correct a typo in the title page of his
> dissertation. The rules are quite clear
> on how to handle this situation: transcribe the title page title in 245 and
> record the corrected title in 246. But
> 246 is defined as Varying Form of Title, and a corrected typo is not a
> variation of the real title in the same way that spelling out ‘and’ for &
> is. Rather, isn’t the corrected (or
> intended) title actually the title of the Work (instead of the
> Manifestation)
> and therefore shouldn’t it be recorded in 240 instead of 246?
>
>
>
>  Please explain the flaws in this logic.
>
> --
> 
> Michael L. Cohen
> Interim Head of Cataloging
> General Library System, University of Wisconsin-Madison
> 324C Memorial Library
> 728 State Street
> Madison, WI 53706-1494
> Phone: (608) 262-3246 Fax: (608) 262-4861
> Email: mco...@library.wisc.edu
>
>
>
>
> -- 
>
> Gene Fieg
> Cataloger/Serials Librarian
> Claremont School of Theology
> gf...@cst.edu
>
>  
>
> Claremont School of Theology and Claremont Lincoln University do not
> represent or endorse the accuracy or reliability of any of the information
> or content contained in this forwarded email.  The forwarded email is that
> of the original sender and does not represent the views of Claremont School
> of Theology or Claremont Lincoln University.  It has been forwarded as a
> courtesy for information only.
>



-- 
Zhonghong (Joan) Wang, Ph.D.
Cataloger -- CMC
Illinois Heartland Library System (Edwardsville Office)
6725 Goshen Road
Edwardsville, IL 62025
618.656.3216x409
618.656.9401Fax

Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

2013-03-07 Thread Benjamin A Abrahamse

I still don't understand why the JSC saw fit to get rid of the device, "[sic]" 
,for bringing gattention to known typos or other minor mistakes in the title.  
I think most users understand what it means, even the ones who don't know Latin.

--Ben

Benjamin Abrahamse
Cataloging Coordinator
Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems
MIT Libraries
617-253-7137

From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] On Behalf Of Gene Fieg
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 11:44 AM
To: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

As far as I understand it, you transcribe what you see.
Just had one of those.  Title was Upnashads.  The record also had a 246.  The 
whole point of a catalog is get the patron to the work he/she wants or is 
seeking, or may find while doing a browse by title on the computer.
Do we want to help the patron or not?
RDA cannot be a cataloging code for catalogers.  It has to be a means to an 
end: "Gee, I am glad I found this.  Thanks."
On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 3:49 AM, Michael Cohen 
mailto:mco...@library.wisc.edu>> wrote:
RDA Exercise




A patron asked us to correct a typo in the title page of his
dissertation. The rules are quite clear
on how to handle this situation: transcribe the title page title in 245 and
record the corrected title in 246. But
246 is defined as Varying Form of Title, and a corrected typo is not a
variation of the real title in the same way that spelling out 'and' for &
is. Rather, isn't the corrected (or
intended) title actually the title of the Work (instead of the Manifestation)
and therefore shouldn't it be recorded in 240 instead of 246?



 Please explain the flaws in this logic.

--

Michael L. Cohen
Interim Head of Cataloging
General Library System, University of Wisconsin-Madison
324C Memorial Library
728 State Street
Madison, WI 53706-1494
Phone: (608) 262-3246 Fax: (608) 
262-4861
Email: mco...@library.wisc.edu



--
Gene Fieg
Cataloger/Serials Librarian
Claremont School of Theology
gf...@cst.edu

Claremont School of Theology and Claremont Lincoln University do not represent 
or endorse the accuracy or reliability of any of the information or content 
contained in this forwarded email.  The forwarded email is that of the original 
sender and does not represent the views of Claremont School of Theology or 
Claremont Lincoln University.  It has been forwarded as a courtesy for 
information only.

Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

2013-03-07 Thread Gene Fieg

As far as I understand it, you transcribe what you see.
Just had one of those.  Title was Upnashads.  The record also had a 246.
The whole point of a catalog is get the patron to the work he/she wants or
is seeking, or may find while doing a browse by title on the computer.
Do we want to help the patron or not?
RDA cannot be a cataloging code for catalogers.  It has to be a means to an
end: "Gee, I am glad I found this.  Thanks."

On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 3:49 AM, Michael Cohen wrote:

> RDA Exercise
>
>
>
>
> A patron asked us to correct a typo in the title page of his
> dissertation. The rules are quite clear
> on how to handle this situation: transcribe the title page title in 245 and
> record the corrected title in 246. But
> 246 is defined as Varying Form of Title, and a corrected typo is not a
> variation of the real title in the same way that spelling out ‘and’ for &
> is. Rather, isn’t the corrected (or
> intended) title actually the title of the Work (instead of the
> Manifestation)
> and therefore shouldn’t it be recorded in 240 instead of 246?
>
>
>
>  Please explain the flaws in this logic.
>
> --
> 
> Michael L. Cohen
> Interim Head of Cataloging
> General Library System, University of Wisconsin-Madison
> 324C Memorial Library
> 728 State Street
> Madison, WI 53706-1494
> Phone: (608) 262-3246 Fax: (608) 262-4861
> Email: mco...@library.wisc.edu
>

-- 
Gene Fieg
Cataloger/Serials Librarian
Claremont School of Theology
gf...@cst.edu

Claremont School of Theology and Claremont Lincoln University do not
represent or endorse the accuracy or reliability of any of the information
or content contained in this forwarded email.  The forwarded email is that
of the original sender and does not represent the views of Claremont School
of Theology or Claremont Lincoln University.  It has been forwarded as a
courtesy for information only.

[RDA-L] Mss. cataloging question

2013-03-07 Thread Rita Lifton

Where in RDA would I find the following information:

I have a question about the carrier term for unbound quires or fragments of 
manuscripts. A codex=a volume; a sheet=leaves as letters, documents, loose 
leaves from a volume. What is the term for quires not yet bound or separated 
from a volume over time?

Thanks,
Rita Lifton
The Library of The Jewish Theological Seminary

Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

2013-03-07 Thread Joseph, Angelina

I agree with this as it is not just the catalog that matters. A thesis or 
dissertation is a permanent item for the person who toiled for many years 
toward that. So s/he wants it to be as accurate as can be. Let the Grad school 
fix the error before it is cataloged.
--angelina

Angelina Joseph
Cataloging Librarian
Ray & Kay Eckstein Law Library
Marquette University
Milwaukee, WI 53201

From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] on behalf of Jerri Swinehart 
[swine...@oakland.edu]
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 9:14 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

I guess my attitude is a bit different. I want to make it clear that there's no 
attempt on my part to cause trouble, but ...

This is one of the problems with RDA. We didn't connect with non-library 
employed users to find out their perspective. I would interpret this request to 
mean that the student is concerned about how a typo will reflect upon him. 
Rather than quote RDA rules, I would give him back the dissertation and suggest 
that he speak with the office on campus ... perhaps the Grad Office ... and see 
if he could re-type the typo correctly, have the item rebound, and THEN it 
could be re-catalogued.

As I catalogue theses and dissertations our Grad Office does indeed ask for 
them back when such things arise. I always willingly comply. It's good PR.

Thank you.

Jerri Swinehart
MLIS
Library Technician III
Metadata Technician
Oakland University
Kresge Library
Technical Services
Rochester, MI 48309-4484
swine...@oakland.edu

Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

2013-03-07 Thread Jerri Swinehart

I guess my attitude is a bit different. I want to make it clear that
there's no attempt on my part to cause trouble, but ...

This is one of the problems with RDA. We didn't connect with non-library
employed users to find out their perspective. I would interpret this
request to mean that the student is concerned about how a typo will reflect
upon him. Rather than quote RDA rules, I would give him back the
dissertation and suggest that he speak with the office on campus ...
perhaps the Grad Office ... and see if he could re-type the typo correctly,
have the item rebound, and THEN it could be re-catalogued.

As I catalogue theses and dissertations our Grad Office does indeed ask for
them back when such things arise. I always willingly comply. It's good PR.

Thank you.

Jerri Swinehart
MLIS
Library Technician III
Metadata Technician
Oakland University
Kresge Library
Technical Services
Rochester, MI 48309-4484
swine...@oakland.edu

Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

2013-03-07 Thread Joan Wang

My feeling is that we recognize the title of a work only when there is more
than one expression. If there is only one expression, we assume that the
title of the manifestation (in 245 filed) indicates the title of the work
as well as the expression. I am not sure that my feeling is correct. Any
clarification is welcome.

Thanks,
Joan Wang
Illinois Heartland Library System

On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 5:49 AM, Michael Cohen wrote:

> RDA Exercise
>
>
>
>
> A patron asked us to correct a typo in the title page of his
> dissertation. The rules are quite clear
> on how to handle this situation: transcribe the title page title in 245 and
> record the corrected title in 246. But
> 246 is defined as Varying Form of Title, and a corrected typo is not a
> variation of the real title in the same way that spelling out ‘and’ for &
> is. Rather, isn’t the corrected (or
> intended) title actually the title of the Work (instead of the
> Manifestation)
> and therefore shouldn’t it be recorded in 240 instead of 246?
>
>
>
>  Please explain the flaws in this logic.
>
> --
> 
> Michael L. Cohen
> Interim Head of Cataloging
> General Library System, University of Wisconsin-Madison
> 324C Memorial Library
> 728 State Street
> Madison, WI 53706-1494
> Phone: (608) 262-3246 Fax: (608) 262-4861
> Email: mco...@library.wisc.edu
>



-- 
Zhonghong (Joan) Wang, Ph.D.
Cataloger -- CMC
Illinois Heartland Library System (Edwardsville Office)
6725 Goshen Road
Edwardsville, IL 62025
618.656.3216x409
618.656.9401Fax

[RDA-L] Typos in Titles

2013-03-07 Thread Michael Cohen

RDA Exercise



 
A patron asked us to correct a typo in the title page of his
dissertation. The rules are quite clear
on how to handle this situation: transcribe the title page title in 245 and
record the corrected title in 246. But
246 is defined as Varying Form of Title, and a corrected typo is not a
variation of the real title in the same way that spelling out ‘and’ for &
is. Rather, isn’t the corrected (or
intended) title actually the title of the Work (instead of the Manifestation)
and therefore shouldn’t it be recorded in 240 instead of 246?



 Please explain the flaws in this logic. 

--

Michael L. Cohen
Interim Head of Cataloging
General Library System, University of Wisconsin-Madison 
324C Memorial Library 
728 State Street
Madison, WI 53706-1494
Phone: (608) 262-3246 Fax: (608) 262-4861
Email: mco...@library.wisc.edu

40 matches

Mail list logo