[RDA-L] RE : [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change
You can access usage statistics through the Administartion System http://admin.rdatoolkit.org/. More information is available in the RDA Toolkit help. Daniel Paradis Bibliothécaire Direction du traitement documentaire des collections patrimoniales Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec 2275, rue Holt Montréal (Québec) H2G 3H1 Téléphone : 514 873-1101, poste 3721 Télécopieur : 514 873-7296 daniel.para...@banq.qc.camailto:daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca http://www.banq.qc.cahttp://www.banq.qc.ca Avis de confidentialité Ce courriel est une communication confidentielle et l’information qu’il contient est réservée à l’usage exclusif du destinataire. Si vous n’êtes pas le destinataire visé, vous n’avez aucun droit d’utiliser cette information, de la copier, de la distribuer ou de la diffuser. Si cette communication vous a été transmise par erreur, veuillez la détruire et nous en aviser immédiatement par courriel. De : Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] de la part de Breeding, Zora [zora.breed...@vanderbilt.edu] Envoyé : 22 novembre 2013 10:30 À : RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change I completely agree with Julie. Instead of considering whether to increase our number of users, we will most likely have to scale back to a bare minimum and hope we can still work efficiently. On that note, does anyone know if we can get usage statistics from the Toolkit. When scaling back, it would be good to know how often we hit our peak. Zora Breeding Vanderbilt University From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Julie Moore Sent: Friday, November 22, 2013 9:16 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change Are you serious?! This is outrageous! Do you know how difficult it was to lobby to get RDA Toolkit for our libraries in the first place? (Many administrators did not really see the need to move from AACR2 to RDA in the first place.) I thought the pricing was high before -- for a basic tool that every cataloger needs. This comes at a time when many libraries are experiencing a crisis in cataloging -- where administrators are looking for reasons to completely get rid of technical services and outsource everything. And now we have to come back with this price structure for a basic tool? RDA is going to be the death of us catalogers! This is not only a problem for large libraries, but also medium libraries. This pricing is going to squeeze libraries out of the market. Catalogers who cannot cough up this kind of money will either have to buy the paper and live with a far less superior version of RDA than the Toolkit ... or just catalog blindly without access to the rules. This is VERY disappointing. Julie Moore Head of Cataloging California State University, Fresno On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 6:59 AM, Heidrun Wiesenmüller wiesenmuel...@hdm-stuttgart.demailto:wiesenmuel...@hdm-stuttgart.de wrote: Isn't it amazing that *nobody* has commented on the new prices for the RDA Toolkit? Looking at http://www.rdatoolkit.org/content/2014pricechange, I had a short moment of mirth when I noticed that the symbol for the British pound is used for the Euro prices as well (let's wait and see whether it will be corrected now). But then the laughter stuck in my throat when I started to calculate. We are told that the new pricing model will be cheaper for small libraries. Indeed, there is a reduction for up to two concurrent users. Compare the new prices with the old ones (given in brackets): * only one person needing the toolkit: $ 180 ($ 195) * 1 concurrent user: $ 180 ($ 325) * 2 concurrent users: $ 342 ($ 380) Note that there is a considerable benefit if you need one concurrent user. However, If there is only one cataloger anyway, or if two concurrent users are needed, the reduction is not a large one. If, however, an institution needs more than two concurrent users, there is a substantial rise in prices - and it gets higher and higher the more users are needed. Again, compare the new prices with the old ones (given in brackets): * 3 concurrent users: $ 513 ($ 435) * 4 concurrent users: $ 684 ($ 490) * 5 concurrent users: $ 835 ($ 545) * 6 concurrent users: $ 1002 ($ 545) * 8 concurrent users: $ 1336 ($ 600) * 10 concurrent users: $ 1620 ($ 825) * 15 concurrent users: $ 2370 ($ 1075) * 20 concurrent users: $ 3060 ($ 1225) * 25 concurrent users: $ 3825 ($ 1450) Try as I may, I can't see how the new pricing model will more fairly distribute the cost of subscription across all sizes of institutions. What I see instead is a drastic rise in prices which will hit every library which needs more than two concurrent users. My guess is that many larger libraries won't be able or willing to buy the number of concurrent users which would be needed according
[RDA-L] Example in Hebrew script (11.2.2.12)
Greetings, We’ve noted that in the last example of the first block of examples of 11.2.2.12 (Agudah ha-geografit ha-Yiśreelit), the form of the name given in Hebrew script in the note does not correspond to the form in Hebrew script used in a 410 field in the authority record for the body (http://lccn.loc.gov/no90009160). The word order is not the same in both sources. Could someone with reading knowledge of Hebrew tell us if the word order is correct in the RDA Toolkit? Many thanks, Daniel Paradis Bibliothécaire Direction du traitement documentaire des collections patrimoniales Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec 2275, rue Holt Montréal (Québec) H2G 3H1 Téléphone : 514 873-1101, poste 3721 Télécopieur : 514 873-7296 daniel.para...@banq.qc.camailto:daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca http://www.banq.qc.cahttp://www.banq.qc.ca Avis de confidentialité Ce courriel est une communication confidentielle et l’information qu’il contient est réservée à l’usage exclusif du destinataire. Si vous n’êtes pas le destinataire visé, vous n’avez aucun droit d’utiliser cette information, de la copier, de la distribuer ou de la diffuser. Si cette communication vous a été transmise par erreur, veuillez la détruire et nous en aviser immédiatement par courriel.
Re: [RDA-L] Example in Hebrew script (11.2.2.12)
Thanks to Nancy and Amy for their replies. It appears that the difference that I noticed was due to word wrapping when the title displays on more than one line. Daniel Paradis Bibliothécaire Direction du traitement documentaire des collections patrimoniales Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec 2275, rue Holt Montréal (Québec) H2G 3H1 Téléphone : 514 873-1101, poste 3721 Télécopieur : 514 873-7296 daniel.para...@banq.qc.camailto:daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca http://www.banq.qc.cahttp://www.banq.qc.ca Avis de confidentialité Ce courriel est une communication confidentielle et l’information qu’il contient est réservée à l’usage exclusif du destinataire. Si vous n’êtes pas le destinataire visé, vous n’avez aucun droit d’utiliser cette information, de la copier, de la distribuer ou de la diffuser. Si cette communication vous a été transmise par erreur, veuillez la détruire et nous en aviser immédiatement par courriel. De : Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] De la part de Nancy Sack Envoyé : 8 novembre 2013 15:12 À : RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : Re: [RDA-L] Example in Hebrew script (11.2.2.12) Daniel, the word order in RDA is correct. It's also correct in the NAF... Nancy On 11/8/2013 9:58 AM, Paradis Daniel wrote: Greetings, We’ve noted that in the last example of the first block of examples of 11.2.2.12 (Agudah ha-geografit ha-Yiśreelit), the form of the name given in Hebrew script in the note does not correspond to the form in Hebrew script used in a 410 field in the authority record for the body (http://lccn.loc.gov/no90009160). The word order is not the same in both sources. Could someone with reading knowledge of Hebrew tell us if the word order is correct in the RDA Toolkit? Many thanks, Daniel Paradis Bibliothécaire Direction du traitement documentaire des collections patrimoniales Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec 2275, rue Holt Montréal (Québec) H2G 3H1 Téléphone : 514 873-1101, poste 3721 Télécopieur : 514 873-7296 daniel.para...@banq.qc.camailto:daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca http://www.banq.qc.cahttp://www.banq.qc.ca Avis de confidentialité Ce courriel est une communication confidentielle et l’information qu’il contient est réservée à l’usage exclusif du destinataire. Si vous n’êtes pas le destinataire visé, vous n’avez aucun droit d’utiliser cette information, de la copier, de la distribuer ou de la diffuser. Si cette communication vous a été transmise par erreur, veuillez la détruire et nous en aviser immédiatement par courriel. -- Nancy Sack Cataloging Department University of Hawaii at Manoa 2550 McCarthy Mall, Honolulu, HI 96822 phone: 808-956-2648 fax: 808-956-5968 e-mail: s...@hawaii.edumailto:s...@hawaii.edu
Re: [RDA-L] Duplicate page numbering
Another option would be cxciv, 148, that is, 195 pages, with a note
explaining that the numbering of pages 1-47 is duplicated. I don't think that
repeating 47 works in this case because the first 47 pages don't form a
separate sequence but are part of the same sequence as pages 48-148.
Daniel Paradis
Bibliothécaire
Direction du traitement documentaire des collections patrimoniales
Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec
2275, rue Holt
Montréal (Québec) H2G 3H1
Téléphone : 514 873-1101, poste 3721
Télécopieur : 514 873-7296
daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca
http://www.banq.qc.ca
Avis de confidentialité
Ce courriel est une communication confidentielle et l'information qu'il
contient est réservée à l'usage exclusif du destinataire. Si vous n'êtes pas le
destinataire visé, vous n'avez aucun droit d'utiliser cette information, de la
copier, de la distribuer ou de la diffuser. Si cette communication vous a été
transmise par erreur, veuillez la détruire et nous en aviser immédiatement par
courriel.
-Message d'origine-
De : Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] De la part de John Hostage
Envoyé : 30 août 2013 16:46
À : RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca
Objet : Re: [RDA-L] Duplicate page numbering
What about cxciv, 47, 47 pages, pages 48-148 with a note as per 3.22.2.7?
--
John Hostage
Senior Continuing Resources Cataloger //
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)
-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Dana Van Meter
Sent: Friday, August 30, 2013 14:10
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Duplicate page numbering
Thanks Mac. I haven't been able to get AACR2 to work via Cataloger's
Desktop for 3 days, and my customer service request to the Toolkit has been
ignored, but was able to access AACR2 via the Toolkit today, after I sent my
question and see that the AACR2 rule has pretty much the same wording,
and the exact same example as the RDA rule, and doesn't have an LCRI. Not
sure why this suddenly was so bothersome to me, as I would have like
further guidance with the AACR2 rule as well. I always dread these books
because of the page numbering, I must have blocked out the memory of
them!
I'm going to do what you suggest and repeat 47 in the 300 |a (cxciv, 47, 47,
148 pages)and will also add a 500 note stating pages 1-47 are duplicated.
It's
odd that others are failing to do this, as they are clearly seeing where the
duplicated paging stops.
Thanks again,
Dana
-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: Friday, August 30, 2013 1:24 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Duplicate page numbering
Dana Van Meter posted:
RDA Rule 3.4.5.12 says to record both pagings and make an explanatory
note, giving the example: xii, 35, 35 pages.
That's what you should do. The cases of one sequence missing is due to the
cataloguer just looking at the last page and not flipping through, I suspect
because they are too preoccupied with the complexities of RDA.
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__
\__
Re: [RDA-L] Citing an unnumbered page
Under AACR2, the practice was to qualify the number with (first sequence), (second sequence), etc., when a given page number could belong to more than one sequence of pages. I think it could still work under RDA, e.g.: 300 $a 4 unnumbered pages, 85 pages 500 $a Published to commemorate XYZ--P. 2 (first sequence). Daniel Paradis Bibliothécaire Direction du traitement documentaire des collections patrimoniales Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec 2275, rue Holt Montréal (Québec) H2G 3H1 Téléphone : 514 873-1101, poste 3721 Télécopieur : 514 873-7296 daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca http://www.banq.qc.ca Avis de confidentialité Ce courriel est une communication confidentielle et l'information qu'il contient est réservée à l'usage exclusif du destinataire. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire visé, vous n'avez aucun droit d'utiliser cette information, de la copier, de la distribuer ou de la diffuser. Si cette communication vous a été transmise par erreur, veuillez la détruire et nous en aviser immédiatement par courriel. De : Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] De la part de Nickeson, Walter Envoyé : 21 août 2013 12:54 À : RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : Re: [RDA-L] Citing an unnumbered page Yes, but if the note says: 500 $a Published to commemorate XYZ-Page 2 you still don't know where it came from, as there are two page 2s in this volume, one with the number on it, the other without. * Walter F. Nickeson, Catalog Metadata Management Librarian Rush Rhees Library University of Rochester Rochester, NY 14627-0055 wnicke...@library.rochester.edu (585) 273-2326 fax: (585) 273-1032 * From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Joan Wang Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 12:20 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Citing an unnumbered page Library of Congress Policy: do not use square brackets in notes except when they are used in quoted data Example: 500 Types of prayer wheels found in south central Tibet, by Mei Lin: pages 310-375. (Not pages [310]-[375]) On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 11:06 AM, Nickeson, Walter wnicke...@library.rochester.edu wrote: In RDA, how would the cited page number be given in the note? AACR2: 300 $a [4], 85 p. 500 $a Published to commemorate XYZ--P. [2]. * Walter F. Nickeson, Catalog Metadata Management Librarian Rush Rhees Library University of Rochester Rochester, NY 14627-0055 wnicke...@library.rochester.edu (585) 273-2326 tel:%28585%29%20273-2326 fax: (585) 273-1032 tel:%28585%29%20273-1032 * -- 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] Leaf (new RDA glossary term and definition)
The method described under 3.4.5.5 is one of two possible methods mentioned in 3.4.5.2. The other one is an explanatory note (see 3.22.2.11) such as Leaves are printed on both sides. Daniel Paradis Bibliothécaire Direction du traitement documentaire des collections patrimoniales Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec 2275, rue Holt Montréal (Québec) H2G 3H1 Téléphone : 514 873-1101, poste 3721 Télécopieur : 514 873-7296 daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca http://www.banq.qc.ca Avis de confidentialité Ce courriel est une communication confidentielle et l'information qu'il contient est réservée à l'usage exclusif du destinataire. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire visé, vous n'avez aucun droit d'utiliser cette information, de la copier, de la distribuer ou de la diffuser. Si cette communication vous a été transmise par erreur, veuillez la détruire et nous en aviser immédiatement par courriel. -Message d'origine- De : Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] De la part de Keith R. Trimmer Envoyé : 16 juillet 2013 00:27 À : RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : Re: [RDA-L] Leaf (new RDA glossary term and definition) On Tue, 16 Jul 2013, J. McRee Elrod wrote: It does not say what to do if printed on both sides, but numbered on only one. I would prefer 50 leaves ([100] pages) to just [100] pages, as being more descriptive. 3.4.5.5 was just revised, but still has the same basic instruction as before (and which also appeared in earlier codes). The first example was revised to make it clearer that it covers precisely this situation: Misleading Numbering In some cases, the numbering on the last page, leaf, or column of a sequence does not represent the total number in that sequence. When this occurs, do not correct it unless it gives a completely false impression of the extent of the resource (e.g., when only alternate pages are numbered or when the number on the last page, leaf, or column of the sequence is misprinted). When correcting misleading numbering, record the numbering as it appears on the last page or leaf followed by that is and the correct number. EXAMPLE 48 leaves, that is, 96 pages Numbered leaves with text on both sides 329, that is, 392 pages --- I believe someone earlier in the thread said he'd never seen a book with printed pages that had numbered leaves instead of numbered pages. It's pretty rare, but I have seen it. Same with numbered columns. I still find it odd, and I've only seen it a few times in the 3+ decades I've been doing this, but it does happen, with about the same frequency for both, in my experience. Later, kt
[RDA-L] RE : [RDA-L] cross ref in AACR2 : abbreviations
The explanation of the abbreviations can be found here: http://www.rdatoolkit.org/AACR2. Daniel Paradis Bibliothécaire Direction du traitement documentaire des collections patrimoniales Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec 2275, rue Holt Montréal (Québec) H2G 3H1 Téléphone : 514 873-1101, poste 3721 Télécopieur : 514 873-7296 daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca http://www.banq.qc.ca Avis de confidentialité Ce courriel est une communication confidentielle et l'information qu'il contient est réservée à l'usage exclusif du destinataire. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire visé, vous n'avez aucun droit d'utiliser cette information, de la copier, de la distribuer ou de la diffuser. Si cette communication vous a été transmise par erreur, veuillez la détruire et nous en aviser immédiatement par courriel. Message d'origine De: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access de la part de Gene Fieg Date: sam. 2013-07-13 16:04 À: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : [RDA-L] cross ref in AACR2 : abbreviations In the AACR2 as presented in RDA there are colored xrefs. Where do I find what those colors mean and especially what the abbreviations mean. I assume that CM = Cartographic materials. Also, what ever happened to the promise to include the index to AACR2. It was promised. No there yet (Used to be found in AACR2 when AACR2 was in CatDesktop.) -- 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] RE : [RDA-L] Recording (large print)
GMD was not even required at the first level of description in AACR2 (see
1.0D1) so how could AACR2 be superior to RDA in this respect? At least in RDA,
Content Type and Carrier Type are core.
Daniel Paradis
Bibliothécaire
Direction du traitement documentaire des collections patrimoniales
Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec
2275, rue Holt
Montréal (Québec) H2G 3H1
Téléphone : 514 873-1101, poste 3721
Télécopieur : 514 873-7296
daniel.para...@banq.qc.camailto:daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca
http://www.banq.qc.cahttp://www.banq.qc.ca/
Avis de confidentialité
Ce courriel est une communication confidentielle et l'information qu'il
contient est réservée à l'usage exclusif du destinataire. Si vous n'êtes pas le
destinataire visé, vous n'avez aucun droit d'utiliser cette information, de la
copier, de la distribuer ou de la diffuser. Si cette communication vous a été
transmise par erreur, veuillez la détruire et nous en aviser immédiatement par
courriel.
_
De: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access de la
part de J. McRee Elrod
Date: dim. 2013-07-07 13:19
À: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca
Objet : Re: [RDA-L] Recording (large print)
Heidrun said:
my understanding is that RDA 3.13.1.3 only tells us that we can record
the font size of resources for persons with visual impairments in this
element, and how we should do it if we choose to. But font size is no
core element ...
What is core for RDA, and what is core for patron needs, are two
*very* different things! AACR2 had a qualified GMD: text (large
print) which worked very well. This is but one example of AACR2's
superiority over RDA in terms of meeting patron needs, as opposed to
conforming to theory.
Possible solutions might be to have text (large print) or just
large print as RDA media content, and/or qualify the unit name:
volume (large print).
Certainly a non core font size note is *not* a viable solution. Early
warning as provided by AACR2 is.
Discussions limited to RDA rule interpretation without reference to
patron needs *really* upset me, as you can probably tell. (I just
went back and replaced shouting capitals with emphasis restricts.)
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing
HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/http://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__
[RDA-L] RE : [RDA-L] 264 All are entity functions required?
According to LC's training material, a date such as not after 2013 would be coded as follows: 008/06: q 008/07-10: 008/11-14: 2013 I assume that in the case of a not before date, code would appear in positions 11-14 instead. Daniel Paradis Bibliothécaire Direction du traitement documentaire des collections patrimoniales Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec 2275, rue Holt Montréal (Québec) H2G 3H1 Téléphone : 514 873-1101, poste 3721 Télécopieur : 514 873-7296 daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca http://www.banq.qc.ca http://www.banq.qc.ca/ Avis de confidentialité Ce courriel est une communication confidentielle et l'information qu'il contient est réservée à l'usage exclusif du destinataire. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire visé, vous n'avez aucun droit d'utiliser cette information, de la copier, de la distribuer ou de la diffuser. Si cette communication vous a été transmise par erreur, veuillez la détruire et nous en aviser immédiatement par courriel. De: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access de la part de Robert Maxwell Date: jeu. 2013-06-13 21:09 À: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : Re: [RDA-L] 264 All are entity functions required? Julie, In addition to what Adam said, in current practice we are required to include subfields $a, $b, and $c in 264 _1 even if we've included core if elements later on, so your first example should read: 264 #1 $a Syracuse, New York : $b [publisher not identified], $c [date of publication not identified] 264 #4 $c ©2009 But as Adam noted, it's better to try to supply a date (as in your second example, which is fine). And actually, if you think about it, we probably never need to record date of publication not identified for a published item even if we have no evidence whatsoever about the date of publication, because we do know one thing: it was published before it got to us for cataloging, so you can always record, if nothing else, ... $c [not after June 13, 2013] (I know, I know, there's the case where a publisher claims to have published something in 2014 and we receive it in 2013, proving that things sometimes get published after we get them, but let's deal with that problem only if the publisher has explicitly put a future publication date on the piece-this has been extensively discussed before in this forum, I believe.) Actually, I now have a question for the collective wisdom of the list. How do you code the MARC fixed date fields if you have a not before or a not after date of publication? I don't see any explanation of this situation in the documentation for 008/06 - 008/14. I could possibly see using q and the date + for a not before date, but what about a not after date? 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. From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Julie Moore Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2013 6:27 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] 264 All are entity functions required? If all that you have is the copyright date, then it should look like this, right? 264 #1 $a Syracuse, New York : $b [publisher not identified] 264 #4 $c ©2009 Is it OK or incorrect to add the copyright date in the 264 bracketed as an inferred date? So it would look like this: 264 #1 $a Syracuse, New York : $b [publisher not identified], $c [2009] 264 #4 $c ©2009 Thanks for your guidance! Best wishes, Julie On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 5:08 PM, Adam L. Schiff asch...@u.washington.edu wrote: I think many catalogers feel that since the copyright date is present on the resource, they should record it even if they've given an inferred publication date in 264 _1 $c. And some libraries have made it a local core element. If it is present, I always record it. Adam Schiff ^^ 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 http://faculty.washington.edu/~aschiff ~~ On Thu, 13 Jun 2013, Julie Moore wrote: Follow up question ... why is it that I see the majority of RDA records with multiple 264s having the 264 _1 (publication) and 264 _4? Is this because the only date they have is a copyright date ... so they put the publisher info in the 264 _1 $a and $b and sometimes $c [copyright date -- so thus, and inferred publication date?] ... and then they are putting the copyright date in the 264 _4? Thanks, Julie
[RDA-L] RE : [RDA-L] Relationship designator for author of the book for a musical
The current definitions of librettist and lyricist in Appendix are not quite clear and have therefore been revised as follows in 6JSC/ALA/13/Sec final (http://www.rda-jsc.org/docs/6JSC-ALA-13-Sec-final.pdf) (to be integrated in the Toolkit in the July update): librettist An author of the words of an opera or other musical stage work, or an oratorio. For an author of the words of just the songs from a musical, see lyricist. lyricist An author of the words of a popular song, including a song or songs from a musical. For an author of just the dialogue from a musical, see librettist. So if the same person wrote the book (i.e. the dialogue) and the lyrics of a musical, the correct term would be librettist. If the book and the lyrics were written by different persons, librettist would be used for the author of the dialogue and lyricist for the author of the lyrics. Daniel Paradis Bibliothécaire Direction du traitement documentaire des collections patrimoniales Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec 2275, rue Holt Montréal (Québec) H2G 3H1 Téléphone : 514 873-1101, poste 3721 Télécopieur : 514 873-7296 daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca http://www.banq.qc.ca http://www.banq.qc.ca/ De: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access de la part de Adam Schiff Date: mar. 2013-06-11 02:10 À: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : [RDA-L] Relationship designator for author of the book for a musical Hi all, What are people using for the author of the book for a musical? The RDA designator librettist seems to be for the sung words in a dramatic musical work, rather than the spoken text. I guess perhaps the correct term would be author? Or would people just use librettist for both the words to the songs in a musical as well as the words spoken that aren't sung? Or perhaps use lyricist for the author of the words to the songs and librettist for the author of the spoken words? Thanks, Adam Schiff Principal Cataloger University of Washington Libraries asch...@uw.edu
Re: [RDA-L] Language of expression
Actually, the LC-PCC PS limits the addition of an expression attribute to four situations, not four types of materials. Translations are one of the categories and are not limited to a specific content type or media type. Daniel Paradis Bibliothécaire Direction du traitement documentaire des collections patrimoniales Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec 2275, rue Holt Montréal (Québec) H2G 3H1 Téléphone : 514 873-1101, poste 3721 Télécopieur : 514 873-7296 daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca http://www.banq.qc.ca Avis de confidentialité Ce courriel est une communication confidentielle et l'information qu'il contient est réservée à l'usage exclusif du destinataire. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire visé, vous n'avez aucun droit d'utiliser cette information, de la copier, de la distribuer ou de la diffuser. Si cette communication vous a été transmise par erreur, veuillez la détruire et nous en aviser immédiatement par courriel. De : Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] De la part de Joan Wang Envoyé : 7 juin 2013 08:55 À : RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : Re: [RDA-L] Language of expression Thanks, Adam RDA 6.27.3 does refer to 6.11 for constructing authorized access point representing an expression. But Library of Congress Policy limits an addition of an expression attribute to four types of materials, which does not include motion pictures. Thanks again, Joan Wang On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 5:02 PM, Adam L. Schiff asch...@u.washington.edu wrote: Joan, In the Defiance example in 6.11.1.4 the recording of the language of expression would, in a bibliographic record, be done only in 041. There aren't three different expressions of the film in English, German, Russian, there is only a single expression which has dialogue in 3 languages. So there wouldn't be separate expression access points for these three languages. In its original theatrically released form, the film has just a single expression, and so you only use a work access point for it. Just as you don't add an expression element to a work access point for the original expression in a single language, you wouldn't add any expression elements to the work access point for a film that is expressed in multiple languages. It's only dubbed versions (translations) that we would include expression access points in a bibliographic record. ^^ Adam L. Schiff Principal Cataloger University of Washington Libraries Box 352900 Seattle, WA 98195-2900 (206) 543-8409 tel:%28206%29%20543-8409 (206) 685-8782 tel:%28206%29%20685-8782 fax asch...@u.washington.edu http://faculty.washington.edu/~aschiff ~~ On Thu, 6 Jun 2013, Joan Wang wrote: Many thanks for your reply, Adam I actually found the example under RDA 6.11.1.4. If following the rule, record each of the languages (in authorized access points) for a motion picture with some dialogue in English, some dialogue in German, and some dialogue in Russian. There is also another example of an atlas involving seven languages. What you are saying is under Library of Congress Policy Appendix 1? English German Russian Resource described: Defiance / Paramount Vantage presents a Grosvenor Park/Bedford Falls production ; an Edward Zwick film ; executive producer, Marshall Herskovitz ; produced by Edward Zwick, Pieter Jan Brugge ; director of photography, Eduardo Serra ; screenplay by Clayton Frohman Edward Zwick ; directed by Edward Zwick. *A motion picture with some dialogue in English, some dialogue in German, and some dialogue in Russian.* Thanks again, Joan Wang On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Adam Schiff asch...@u.washington.eduwrote: For a film in which there are multiple languages spoken in a single expression, you would not use an expression access point at all. You would just use the access point for the work, but you would record the languages in 008 and 041 and 546 only. The example in RDA is Defiance: 041 0_ eng $a ger $a rus 130 0 Defiance (Motion picture : 2008) 245 10 Defiance / $c Paramount Vantage presents a Grosvenor Park/Bedford Falls production ; an Edward Zwick film ; executive producer, Marshall Herskovitz ; produced by Edward Zwick, Pieter Jan Brugge ; director of photography, Eduardo Serra ; screenplay by Clayton Frohman Edward Zwick ; directed by Edward Zwick. 546 In English, German, and Russian. Now if the DVD you had of this film also had dubbed versions or subtitled versions, you could make additional access points for those expressions included on your manifestation: 041 1_ eng $a ger $a rus $a fre $a spa $j eng $j fre $j spa $h eng $h ger $h rus 546 In English, German, and Russian; dubbed French or dubbed Spanish dialogue with optional English, French, or Spanish subtitles. 730 02 $I Contains (expression): $a Defiance
Re: [RDA-L] Relationship designators for related expressions, works etc for a music score
I agree with Andra that “Musical setting of (work)” is not appropriate because the Neruda poems have been used as an inspiration for the musical work but not actually set to music. A better designator would be “based on (work)” (in which case the access point(s) would not include the subfield $l) or “based on (expression)”, if you think that the composer drew his inspiration from the English translation of the poems and not from the original version. This LC record provides an example: http://lccn.loc.gov/2013560310. This record is also an illustration of LC policy regarding instrumental works that are based on, inspired by, etc., one or two literary works (see LC-PCC PS for 25.0 http://access.rdatoolkit.org/document.php?id=lcpschp25# http://access.rdatoolkit.org/document.php?id=lcpschp25 ). Daniel Paradis Bibliothécaire Direction du traitement documentaire des collections patrimoniales Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec 2275, rue Holt Montréal (Québec) H2G 3H1 Téléphone : 514 873-1101, poste 3721 Télécopieur : 514 873-7296 daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca http://www.banq.qc.ca Avis de confidentialité Ce courriel est une communication confidentielle et l’information qu’il contient est réservée à l’usage exclusif du destinataire. Si vous n’êtes pas le destinataire visé, vous n’avez aucun droit d’utiliser cette information, de la copier, de la distribuer ou de la diffuser. Si cette communication vous a été transmise par erreur, veuillez la détruire et nous en aviser immédiatement par courriel. De : Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] De la part de Andra Patterson Envoyé : 5 juin 2013 21:13 À : RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : Re: [RDA-L] Relationship designators for related expressions, works etc for a music score Hi Siân, Here are my thoughts, for what they're worth! Yes, I think it is useful to record the relationship between Neruda's work and Daughtrey's concerto. This is recorded as a relationship to a related work (25.1) and it could be recorded as an unstructured description in the 500 rather than in 500 and 700 (see the 2nd example in the final box of examples at 25.1.1.3). As you point out, the text of the poems does not form part of the work, so the relationship designator musical setting of (work) is not appropriate. Using an unstructured description to record the relationship eliminates the need for a relationship designator. You could record a whole-part relationship as a 700 to record the fact that the poems are contained in the resource, using a relationship designator from J.3.4: 100 1 ‡a Daughtrey, Nathan ‡e composer. 240 10 ‡a Concertos, ‡m vibraphone, percussion ensemble 245 10 ‡a Concerto for vibraphone percussion ensemble / ‡c Nathan Daughtrey. 500‡a The two-movement work draws inspiration from two opposing poems by Pablo Neruda that depict night and day--Program notes. 700 12 ‡i Contains (expression): ‡a Neruda, Pablo, ‡d 1904-1973. ‡t Poems. ‡k Selections. ‡l English. I apologise in advance if my thoughts are incorrect - I'm happy to be corrected! Best wishes, Andra Andra Patterson | Team Leader, Cataloguing Team 2 National Library of New Zealand PO Box 1467, Wellington 6140 Email: andra.patter...@dia.govt.nz | Direct Dial: +64 4 460 2858 | Internal extension: 3258 | http://natlib.govt.nz/ From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Sian Woolcock Sent: Thursday, 6 June 2013 12:02 p.m. To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: [RDA-L] Relationship designators for related expressions, works etc for a music score Hi everyone, Hoping I could get some advice on a music score I am currently cataloguing in RDA. My score is a concerto for Vibraphone and Percussion ensemble. The program notes written in the score include two poems by Pablo Neruda (written in English) and the statement “The two-movement work draws inspiration from two opposing poems by Pablo Neruda that depict night and day”. The poems do not form any part of the actual music of the score (so would not be performed as they are neither narrated or sung). Whilst they will not be part of any performance of the score I want to make reference to Neruda as the poems were considered significant enough inspiration to the composer that their text was printed in the program notes. My questions are 1. Am I correct in my assumption that Neruda’s work/inspiration should be recorded in the record as a related expression? 2. Is a name title 700 entry (see below) the best way to do this? 3. Is the relationship designator I have used from Appendix J (J 2.2) of the toolkit the appropriate one given that the text does not form part of the actual work? (i.e. it’s not a libretto) - ‡i musical setting
[RDA-L] RE : [RDA-L] a rather than t for ETD
With the latest update to the RDA Toolkit, instruction 2.8.1.1 now includes the sentence: Consider all online resources to be published. Daniel Paradis Bibliothécaire Direction du traitement documentaire des collections patrimoniales Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec 2275, rue Holt Montréal (Québec) H2G 3H1 Téléphone : 514 873-1101, poste 3721 Télécopieur : 514 873-7296 daniel.para...@banq.qc.camailto:daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca http://www.banq.qc.cahttp://www.banq.qc.ca/ _ De: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access de la part de J. McRee Elrod Date: ven. 2013-05-17 23:12 À: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : Re: [RDA-L] a rather than t for ETD Greta asked: So, if we are supposed to be cataloging online monographs according to Prov= ider-neutral guidelines, wouldn't that mean that they would still be catalo= ged as unpublished? If it is electronic, it is considered published. J. McRee (Mac) Elrod 4493 Lindholm Road Victoria BC V9C 3Y1 Canada (250) 474-3361 m...@elrod.ca
Re: [RDA-L] Authorized Version (6.23.2.9.2)
You are right, the adaptation of 6.23.2.9.2 that was made in the French version was deliberate, to respect the spirit of 0.11.2 and ensure that titles for the books of the Bible would be recorded in French in a French catalogue. It goes without saying that the French cataloguing community would support a proposal to make that rule more international. Daniel Paradis Bibliothécaire Direction du traitement documentaire des collections patrimoniales Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec 2275, rue Holt Montréal (Québec) H2G 3H1 Téléphone : 514 873-1101, poste 3721 Télécopieur : 514 873-7296 daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca http://www.banq.qc.ca Avis de confidentialité Ce courriel est une communication confidentielle et l'information qu'il contient est réservée à l'usage exclusif du destinataire. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire visé, vous n'avez aucun droit d'utiliser cette information, de la copier, de la distribuer ou de la diffuser. Si cette communication vous a été transmise par erreur, veuillez la détruire et nous en aviser immédiatement par courriel. -Message d'origine- De : Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] De la part de Heidrun Wiesenmüller Envoyé : 16 mai 2013 08:21 À : RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : [RDA-L] Authorized Version (6.23.2.9.2) RDA 6.23.2.9.2 says: For books of the Catholic or Protestant canon, record the brief citation form of the Authorized Version as a subdivision of the preferred title for the Bible. Is my interpretation correct that Authorized Version here is not meant in a general sense of some standard version, but rather as a reference to a specific English version of the Bible, namely the King James Bible? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorized_Version I'm asking because I've just noticed that of the Authorized Version has been translated into German as der autorisierten Version (i.e. of the authorized version, in a general descriptive sense, not as a specific title). This makes it sound as if it was some unspecified, somehow authorized version, which doesn't sound right to me. Also, it wouldn't be helpful as it doesn't tell us who is supposed to do the authorizing (the agency?) and according to which criteria. The French, on the other hand, seem to have deliberately - and, I'd say, very reasonably - changed the meaning: Pour les livres du canon catholique ou protestant, enregistrer une forme brève du titre du livre consacré par l'usage en français comme subdivision du titre privilégié de la Bible. So, they explicitly state that the title of the book should follow French usage. I think 6.23.2.9.2 should be adapted to make it really international, e.g. by saying record the title of the book according to a standard version of the Bible in the language and script preferred by the agency. Heidrun -- - Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A. Stuttgart Media University Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi
Re: [RDA-L] Creators of museum catalogs
Hi Heidrun, The relevant instruction is 6.27.1.3. The first exception Corporate bodies as creators addresses cases where one or more corporate bodies and one or more persons or families are collaboratively responsible for creating a work that falls into one or more of the categories at 19.2.1.1.1. The instruction now clearly states that the corporate body has precedence over persons or families when the access point for the work is constructed. RDA therefore acknowledges that a corporate body and a person can work together as creators. For that reason, I agree with you that it is odd that in the example you quote the persons involved are not listed as creators. This is an issue that might be worth raising with the RDA Examples Group through your JSC representative. LC has also prepared training material on art catalogs available here (http://www.loc.gov/aba/rda/Refresher_training_dec_2011.html) that you might find useful to understand how RDA deals with museum catalogs. Daniel Paradis Bibliothécaire Direction du traitement documentaire des collections patrimoniales Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec 2275, rue Holt Montréal (Québec) H2G 3H1 Téléphone : 514 873-1101, poste 3721 Télécopieur : 514 873-7296 daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca http://www.banq.qc.ca Avis de confidentialité Ce courriel est une communication confidentielle et l'information qu'il contient est réservée à l'usage exclusif du destinataire. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire visé, vous n'avez aucun droit d'utiliser cette information, de la copier, de la distribuer ou de la diffuser. Si cette communication vous a été transmise par erreur, veuillez la détruire et nous en aviser immédiatement par courriel. De : Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] De la part de Heidrun Wiesenmüller Envoyé : 3 mai 2013 02:23 À : RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : [RDA-L] Creators of museum catalogs Talking about creators: One thing I find very puzzling is the treatment of collections in a museum. Maybe I only have these problems because the German rules for main entry for corporate bodies are completely different from the Anglo-American tradition. So, perhaps you can help me here. Bowman says in his Essential cataloguing (which was the very first book on AACR2 I ever read), p. 100: What happens if the item falls under rule 21.1B2 but also appears to have a personal author? The rules tell us nothing in themselves, but the answer becomes apparent when you start to look at the examples that follow. From these it becomes obvious that entry under corporate body, if it applies, takes precedence over personal authorship. This means that, for example, a catalogue of a collection in a particular museum, provided that it emanates from the museum, will be entered under the heading for the museum even if it has a personal author. He gives the following example: Pre-Raphaelite drawings in the British museum / J.A. Gere Main entry is under the British museum, with an added entry for Gere. So far, so good. But now when I look at RDA 19.2.1.3, there is a very similar example under Works of an administrative nature: Furniture from British India and Ceylon : a catalogue of the collections in the Victoria and Albert Museum and the Peabody Essex Museum / Amin Jaffer ; assisted in Salem by Karina Corrigan and with a contribution by Robin D. Jones ; photographs by Mike Kitcatt, Markham Sexton and Jeffrey Dykes. - Salem, Massachusetts : Peabody Essex Museum The creators are given as: Victoria and Albert Museum Peabody Essex Museum Now, I don't have a problem with the fact that the museums are seen as creators. But I don't understand why there is no third creator, namely the personal author Amin Jaffer. Shouldn't this also be a case of persons, families, or corporate bodies [being] jointly responsible for the creation of a work (19.2.1.1)? I don't see how this case is any different from others where the creators perform different roles. My speculation is that perhaps in RDA's system it is simply not possible for a corporate body and a person to work together as creators, i.e. that 19.2.1.1 should be read as either more than one person or more than one family or more than one corporate body jointly responsible for the creation of a work. But if this is the case, then it should have been clearly stated. Also, I really can't see a reason why it shouldn't be possible to have a collaboration of a corporate body and a person in the creation of a work. And there is another question: If Amin Jaffer or J.A. Gere in Bowman's example are not considered to be creators, then what else could they be? My feeling is that their contribution is at the level of the work, and not at expression level. So the only possibility would be to consider them as other persons associated with a work (19.3.1),
Re: [RDA-L] Cross training
A good place to get free RDA training materials is the Catalogers Learning Workshop page on RDA: http://www.loc.gov/catworkshop/RDA%20training%20materials/index.html. The page links, among others, to the RDA training materials that the Library of Congress has been using for internal training since June 2012 and which should give any cataloguer a very good foundation: http://www.loc.gov/catworkshop/RDA%20training%20materials/LC%20RDA%20Training/LC%20RDA%20course%20table.html. Daniel Paradis Bibliothécaire Direction du traitement documentaire des collections patrimoniales Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec 2275, rue Holt Montréal (Québec) H2G 3H1 Téléphone : 514 873-1101, poste 3721 Télécopieur : 514 873-7296 daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca http://www.banq.qc.ca http://www.banq.qc.ca/ De : Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] De la part de Paul Davey Envoyé : 22 février 2013 09:20 À : RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : [RDA-L] Cross training I have not been on this list for several years now, so forgive me if I'm (as I suspect) asking something that been asked many times before, but : If I (a) need to cross-train from AACR2 to RDA, initially for monographs (b) I have no institutional financial support (c) I can't afford training prices that I see on the web what can I do? I'm not asking this to be negative or critical, which it might sound, but just to find a way of getting cross-trained without spending a lot of money. I can see a few books, but even they are more than I want to spend since the money would have to come out of my own pocket. Paul Davey
Re: [RDA-L] Change of title, not content : RDA experts
LC's RDA training materials provides the answer to your question (see http://www.loc.gov/catworkshop/RDA%20training%20materials/LC%20RDA%20Training/Module3ExpressionsAndContentSept12.doc, Appendix 2). The examples provided indicate that a uniform title would be used to collocate the editions if following LC practice: C. New title proper, and the work has been revised o new expression o UT field for original preferred title -- change from AACR2 (related work a.e.) Example A: Original: 100 $a Monson, Craig. 245 $a Disembodied voices : $b music and culture in an early modern Italian convent / $c Craig A. Monson. 260 $a Berkeley : $b University of California Press, $c 1995. Revision: 100 $a Monson, Craig. 240 $a Disembodied voices 245 $a Divas in the convent : $b nuns, music, and defiance in seventeenth-century Italy / $c Craig A. Monson. 260 $a Chicago : $b University of Chicago Press, $c 2012. 500 $a Revision of the author's Disembodied voices. Example B: Original: 245 $a Contemporary art and multicultural education / $c edited by Susan Cahan and Zoya Kucor. 260 $a New York : $b New Museum of Contemporary Art : $b Routledge, $c 1996. Revision: 130 $a Contemporary art and multicultural education 245 $a Rethinking Contemporary Art and Multicultural Education / $c The New Museum of Contemporary Art. 250 $a Fully revised second edition. 260 $a New York, NY : $b Routledge, $c 2011. Daniel Paradis Bibliothécaire Direction du traitement documentaire des collections patrimoniales Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec 2275, rue Holt Montréal (Québec) H2G 3H1 Téléphone : 514 873-1101, poste 3721 Télécopieur : 514 873-7296 daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca http://www.banq.qc.ca http://www.banq.qc.ca/ De : Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] De la part de Gene Fieg Envoyé : 19 février 2013 14:12 À : RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : Re: [RDA-L] Change of title, not content : RDA experts On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Gene Fieg gf...@cst.edu wrote: I asked this question before, but we might as well go with RDA in this matter. Book in hand: A brief history of the Western world / Thomas H. Greer, Gavin Lewis. Prev. title: A brief history of Western man. Under RDA do we need a preferred access point (i.e. u.t.) for this? Chapter 6 ain't too clear and I don't see an LCCPS on this. LC has classed both under the same class using the same cutter. -- 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. -- 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] Carrier type Flipchart
Heidrun, You are right that 3.4.1.5 is actually an alternative to the basic rule of recording extent (3.4.1.3). LC put forward a proposal to correct this situation (http://www.rda-jsc.org/docs/6JSC-LC-17.pdf), which was accepted with revision at the last JSC meeting (November 2012). This kind of revisions is scheduled to be incorporated in RDA in the following April update of the Toolkit. Daniel Paradis Bibliothécaire Direction du traitement documentaire des collections patrimoniales Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec 2275, rue Holt Montréal (Québec) H2G 3H1 Téléphone : 514 873-1101, poste 3721 Télécopieur : 514 873-7296 daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca http://www.banq.qc.ca -Message d'origine- De : Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] De la part de Heidrun Wiesenmüller Envoyé : 2 février 2013 09:41 À : RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : Re: [RDA-L] Carrier type Flipchart Benjamin, I absolutely agree. More's the pity that RDA's standard rule for the extent element (3.4.1.3) requires us to give the number of units and an appropriate term for the type of carrier as listed under 3.3.1.3. Fortunately, there is also rule 3.4.1.5 c) which allows us to use a term in common usage (...) as an alternative to a term listed under 3.3.1.3, if preferred by the agency preparing the description. (By the way: I wonder why this rule isn't presented as an option under 3.4.1.3?) Surprisingly, the LC-PCC PS for 3.4.1.5 only refers to a) (if the carrier is in a newly developed format that is not yet covered in the list under 3.3.1.3) and doesn't give any guidance as to c). So I wonder: What will the general practice be in MARC 300 $a? Am I right in assuming that almost nobody will use things like videodisc here and instead use more specific terms like DVD and Blue-ray disc? Heidrun
[RDA-L] TR: [RDA-L] RDA dtst t + a 260/264 muse on training question
Benjamin A Abrahamse wrote : I'm curious if people who oppose the use of t (pub date/copyright date) instead of s (pub date only) in the fixed fields are having problems getting their systems to parse the data correctly or if it just looks funny (redundant) to them because, like all of us, their frame of reference is AACR2, which treats (or ignores) copyright statements based on their relationship to publication date. I oppose the use of t instead of s in the 008/06 because it is not consistent with the principle already applied for code p. As a music cataloguer, I'm used to see recordings that are recorded in the same year that they are released. Because two different types of dates are involved, code p (Date of distribution/release/issue and production/recording session) could theoretically be applicable but the MARC documentation explicitly says that code p is used only when the two dates are different. Dates of recording are important to music users and under both AACR2 and RDA, they are given in the record (field 518 and/or 033) even if they are identical to another date already recorded, such as a publication date or a copyright date. Yet, it was felt that recording the date only once in field 008 was sufficient and that code s should be used in these situations. I fail to see why copyright dates should be treated differently than dates of recording as far as MARC coding is concerned. This difference is annoying because music cataloguers (and video cataloguer too) will have to remember different practices depending on the types of dates encountered. This is the type of useless distinctions that I was hoping RDA would reduce if not eliminate, not increase. Daniel Paradis Bibliothécaire Direction du traitement documentaire des collections patrimoniales Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec 2275, rue Holt Montréal (Québec) H2G 3H1 Téléphone : 514 873-1101, poste 3721 Télécopieur : 514 873-7296 daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca http://www.banq.qc.ca -Message d'origine- De : Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] De la part de Benjamin A Abrahamse Envoyé : 31 janvier 2013 12:59 À : RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : Re: [RDA-L] RDA dtst t + a 260/264 muse on training question I'm curious if people who oppose the use of t (pub date/copyright date) instead of s (pub date only) in the fixed fields are having problems getting their systems to parse the data correctly or if it just looks funny (redundant) to them because, like all of us, their frame of reference is AACR2, which treats (or ignores) copyright statements based on their relationship to publication date. The MARC definition is pretty unambiguous that when 008/byte 06 is set to t, 008/bytes 07-10 represent publication date and 008/bytes 11-14 represent copyright date, and I should think any MARC-compliant ILS would be aware of that and index it appropriately. Certainly it is a good question whether the date fixed field is the best place to recording copyright dates in a machine actionable way; but that is really an issue of how the MARC format is designed and implemented. Under AACR2 copyright date was only recorded when it differed from publication date, or when publication date was unavailable. That is, its function under AACR2 was to assist in the identification of the piece. Under RDA, copyright is treated as a separate data element (date associated with a claim of protection under copyright or a similar regime, RDA 2.11), one that is not necessarily related to date of publication/distribution/manufacture. That is, it is metadata that informs users about what rights have been asserted over a document, and not just metadata that assists in identifying it. To be sure, when date of publication/manufacture/distribution cannot be found, it continues to function as a reasonable facsimile for publication date. Hence the lengthy commentary in the LC/PCC PS to 2.8.6.6. So when we have only a copyright date we can copy that date and put it in brackets (as supplied data) in the 264:x1:$c. But the statement of rights, if I understand RDA correctly, should always be recorded (it is designated a core element) if it is available on the source(s) of information. I think the way RDA presents this is unfortunate and bound to lead to or perpetuate the confusion that surrounds copyright vs publication date. Its placement in the instructions directly adjacent to instructions for recording publication information, suggests that copyright is more or less the same as publication date, as it was under AACR2. Moreover I think they should have called this element copyright statement not copyright date, as the latter leads to confusion (if the element is copyright date why include the © character? what about other similar regimes such as legal deposit, etc.?) Nevertheless the practice of recording copyright data
Re: [RDA-L] RDA dtst t + a 260/264 muse on training question
Patricia Fogler asked : How useful/necessary/correct is it to code this dtst to other than s have duplicate dates in the 008 date area? The Canadian Committee on MARC felt exactly the same way when Proposal 2011-02, which included examples of duplicate dates in the 008 field, was discussed by MARBI in June 2011. This practice is also inconsistent with what the MARC documentation instructs to do when using code p (this code is used only if the date of recording, production, etc., is different than the date recorded as Date 1). According to the minutes of the June 2011 MARBI meeting (http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/minutes/an-11.html), Margaret Stewart (LAC) relayed the comment from the Canadian Committee on MARC that code t should only be used when publication date and copyright date are different. Rebecca Guenther (LC) agreed that that was the major question and stated that the examples in the proposal were written to include the date, whether or not publication date and copyright date are different. Gary Strawn (ALCTS) asked Sally McCallum (LC) and Rebecca Guenther (LC) to take LAC's comment into consideration and make editorial changes to the documentation where appropriate. It is not clear for me from the minutes if there was agreement to follow up on Gary Strawn's suggestion but if there was, it would be great if the documentation was edited to restrict code t to cases where the copyright date is different than the publication date. Daniel Paradis Bibliothécaire Direction du traitement documentaire des collections patrimoniales Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec 2275, rue Holt Montréal (Québec) H2G 3H1 Téléphone : 514 873-1101, poste 3721 Télécopieur : 514 873-7296 daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca http://www.banq.qc.ca -Message d'origine- De : Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] De la part de FOGLER, PATRICIA A GS-11 USAF AETC AUL/LTSC Envoyé : 28 janvier 2013 13:12 À : RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : [RDA-L] RDA dtst t + a 260/264 muse on training question I'll apologize in advance for the length of this. I'm trying to work up some RDA training for my copy cataloging staff and am working through a number of DLC RDA records that we are downloading. For the past year, we've had RDA records routed to our Non-DLC cataloger as we wait for RDA to settle. Given that the numbers of RDA records are increasing we're rapidly approaching April, I need to get some basic local guidelines set move these back to our LC copy catalogers. I'm having particular issues with aspects of the publication area. My current question: I'm repeatedly seeing in the 008 dtst t used to indicate a publication and copyright date. While it is technically correct that both dates are given in this record, in the past we've mainly seen and used t in the dtst field when those dates differ, even by a year. What I'm seeing now is this sort of transcription (an older record still using 260): 260 Stanford, California : |b Stanford University Press, |c [2012], ©2012. Trying to make sense out of this coding I viewed this record in LC's catalog they have used 008 dtst s with: 264 _1 |a Stanford, California : |b Stanford University Press, |c [2012] [title in question is Competitive strategies for the 21st century : theory, history, and practice] OCLC770694281 LC 2011052146 The 008 dtst coding of the record in LC's database (as opposed to the record we downloaded from OCLC which apparently has been edited separately) looks more correct to me. The former coding in OCLC looks like overkill -- How useful/necessary/correct is it to code this dtst to other than s have duplicate dates in the 008 date area? This raises the larger question: for those working up training for your copy catalogers, at what point do you tell your people to leave copy as is, even if that isn't what you would personally prefer? To the average library user, both transcriptions give essentially the same information. At this point, given the variety of 260/264 interpretations/transcriptions, I'm seriously debating telling my copy catalogers If the 008/260 in the LC copy record adequately conveys the book in hand is essentially correct, leave it. While I appreciate cataloger discretion when I am creating a record or editing existing copy, I'm finding it exceedingly difficult to create these local copycat editing guidelines for the plethora of interpretations we're seeing. Impatiently waiting for RDA postings from ALA Midwinter to be posted. //SIGNED// Patricia Fogler Chief, Cataloging Section (AUL/LTSC) Muir S. Fairchild Research Information Center DSN 493-2135 Comm (334) 953-2135
Re: [RDA-L] punctuation in 511 notes
My understanding is that there is indeed a contradiction between the examples and the practice recommended by ISBD. RDA examples should be given using ISBD punctuation. The consolidated edition of ISBD says that within notes, it is recommended, where appropriate, that the prescribed punctuation of areas 1-6 be followed (p. 199). Notes on performer, narrators and presenters are usually given in a format where the prescribed punctuation for statements of responsibility of area 1 would be appropriate. The prescribed punctuation is to precede each subsequent statement of responsibility by a space, semicolon, space (ISBD, p. 43). The examples of notes on statements of responsibility in rule 7.1.4 of ISBD, including a note on performers, follow the recommended prescribed punctuation. This punctuation is not mandatory but it would make sense that RDA illustrates the practice recommended by ISBD. Daniel Paradis Bibliothécaire Direction du traitement documentaire des collections patrimoniales Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec 2275, rue Holt Montréal (Québec) H2G 3H1 Téléphone : 514 873-1101, poste 3721 Télécopieur : 514 873-7296 daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca http://www.banq.qc.ca http://www.banq.qc.ca/ De : Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] De la part de McRae, Rick Envoyé : 1 novembre 2012 09:44 À : RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : [RDA-L] punctuation in 511 notes Greetings: I wonder if the apparent contradiction between the examples found in 7.23.1.3, Recording Performers, Narrators and/or Presenters which are represented in the 511 field, and the punctuation rule expressed in Appendix D.1.2.1: Precede each mark of prescribed punctuation by a space and follow it by a space.. The aforementioned examples clearly disregard this. I'm not losing sleep about this or anything, but it is a quandary of sorts, and it would be good to hear how others resolve this seemingly mixed message. Thank you and best regards, Rick McRae Catalog / Reference Librarian Sibley Music Library Eastman School of Music (585) 274-1370
[RDA-L] RE : [RDA-L] 370 Russia, Federation ?
Bob Maxwell wrote: Or perhaps we should record just Russia in 370? Is this a case like Adams (Iowa : Township), where we would just record Adams, Iowa in 370, dropping the type of jurisdiction qualifier (by NACO policy)? In AACR2, rule 24.4C1 explicitly asked not to include the additions to names of places prescribed in 24.6 [e.g., type of jurisdiction] when the names of these places are used to indicate the location of corporate bodies. I could not find a similar instruction in RDA that would apply to places recorded as attributes of persons, families, corporate bodies, etc. Do you mean to say that it is NACO policy to continue this practice under RDA even though it seems to contradict RDA instructions? Thanks, Daniel Paradis Bibliothécaire Direction du traitement documentaire de la Collection patrimoniale Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec 2275, rue Holt Montréal (Québec) H2G 3H1 Téléphone : 514 873-1101, poste 3721 Télécopieur : 514 873-7296 daniel.para...@banq.qc.camailto:daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca http://www.banq.qc.cahttp://www.banq.qc.ca/ _ De: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access de la part de Robert Maxwell Date: jeu. 2012-10-11 19:32 À: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : Re: [RDA-L] 370 Russia, Federation ? Good question, Adam. I assume it's because people have gotten into their mind that the rule is remove the parentheses and replace with a comma but of course even though that usually works that isn't actually what is called for in the last paragraph of 16.2.2.4, which says to precede the name of the LARGER PLACE by a comma. As you observe Federation isn't the name of a larger place, so presumably it should be recorded Russia (Federation) in 370. Or perhaps we should record just Russia in 370? Is this a case like Adams (Iowa : Township), where we would just record Adams, Iowa in 370, dropping the type of jurisdiction qualifier (by NACO policy)? This also has bearing on qualifiers used with corporate bodies. I've been looking for examples in the authority file of Russia being used as a qualifier on a corporate body and I see inconsistency-in some cases people have used (Russia) e.g. Evrazii?skii? sovet po standartizat?s?ii, metrologii, i sertifikat?s?ii (Russia); in others they've used (Russia (Federation)), e.g. Don Cossack Chorus (Russia (Federation)), both recent LC records. The majority seem to be just (Russia). In any case, I don't think there's any justification for Russia, Federation in 370. Bob Robert L. Maxwell Special Collections and Ancient Languages Catalog Librarian Genre/Form Authorities Librarian 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 Adam L. Schiff Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 4:19 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: [RDA-L] 370 Russia, Federation ? I'm seeing a lot of records where 370 $c or $e has the following recorded: Russia, Federation Is there any reason why people are not recording this in the authorized form of Russia (Federation)? Most of the records (and they are numerous) were created by LC or U Chicago catalogers. I'm trying to figure out what might cause a cataloger to record this place by replacing the parentheses with a comma. --Adam ^^ 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 http://faculty.washington.edu/~aschiff ~~
[RDA-L] RE : [RDA-L] 370 Russia, Federation ?
The LC-PCC PS for 11.3.1.3 applies only to the element Place Associated with the Corporate Body, though. If the practice of omitting the type of jurisdiction is to be followed for all the elements that are recorded in field 370, I would suggest adopting a similar policy statement for 9.8 (Place of Birth), Place of Death (9.9), Country Associated with the Person (9.10), etc. Cataloguers, especially those who are not NACO participants, should not have to consult DCM Z1 to determine the correct form of a place name recorded in field 370. Daniel Paradis Bibliothécaire Direction du traitement documentaire de la Collection patrimoniale Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec 2275, rue Holt Montréal (Québec) H2G 3H1 Téléphone : 514 873-1101, poste 3721 Télécopieur : 514 873-7296 daniel.para...@banq.qc.camailto:daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca http://www.banq.qc.cahttp://www.banq.qc.ca/ _ De: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access de la part de John Hostage Date: ven. 2012-10-12 15:02 À: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : Re: [RDA-L] 370 Russia, Federation ? LC-PCC PS for 11.3.1.3 says do not include the type of jurisdiction. DCM Z1 for field 370 says make the same adjustments as when using the place name as a parenthetical qualifier to names. AACR2 24.4C1 says Do not include the additions to names of places prescribed in 24.6 when the names of these places are used to indicate the location of corporate bodies. So the form in field 370 should be Russia. All of which begs the question of whether we really need separate access points for the different periods of Russian history. -- John Hostage Authorities and Database Integrity Librarian Harvard Library--Information and Technical Services Langdell Hall 194 Cambridge, MA 02138 host...@law.harvard.edumailto:host...@law.harvard.edu +(1)(617) 495-3974 (voice) +(1)(617) 496-4409 (fax)
Re: [RDA-L] Title entries (Was: Editor as main entry)
James Weinheimer wrote: Still, there is no reason for a single 1xx field any longer. Too bad that wasn't dropped instead of the rule of three... RDA is not concerned with encoding but rule 6.27.1.3 does give the alternative to Include in the authorized access point representing the work the authorized access points for all creators named in resources embodying the work or in reference sources (in the order in which they are named in those sources). Also, it should be noted that chapter 19 does not set any limits on the number of creators recorded. Daniel Paradis Bibliothécaire Direction du traitement documentaire des collections patrimoniales Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec 2275, rue Holt Montréal (Québec) H2G 3H1 Téléphone : 514 873-1101, poste 3721 Télécopieur : 514 873-7296 daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca http://www.banq.qc.ca http://www.banq.qc.ca/ De : Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] De la part de James Weinheimer Envoyé : 9 octobre 2012 03:43 À : RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : [RDA-L] Title entries (Was: Editor as main entry) On 08/10/2012 19:27, Adam L. Schiff wrote: snip Because the rule of three from AACR2 is gone, it doesn't matter how many creators there are for a work. In RDA the authorized access point for a work is the combination of the first named or prominently named creator and the preferred title for the work. Hence: AACR2 245 00 $a Title Z / $c by Authors A ... [et al.]. 700 1_ $a Author A. RDA 100 1_ $a Author A. 245 10 $a Title Z / $c by Authors A, B, C, and D. /snip Yes, and the problem with this (other than changing the rule of three to the rule of one and maintaining that it increases access--but that is another point) is that the 1xx field is not repeatable. If the four authors have equal responsibility, they should all be in the 100 field, while those with other responsibilities would go into 7xx, thereby making it similar to Dublin Core's creator and contributor. The reason there is only a single 1xx field is historical: something that was very useful before has no use today but it sticks around. Much like an appendix or the coccyx. If we were making records completely from scratch today, single main entries would not even be thought of. Also, in the past, titles were considered quite differently from how catalogers consider them today. I remember how I was struck by the cavalier fashion they were handled in earlier catalogs, when I first started researching them. Many times, they weren't traced at all, even with anonymous works. Several times, I saw them just thrown in together into a section called Anonymous, pseudonymous, etc. works which made it pretty much useless. Journals were often included in these sections because the idea of corporate authorship took awhile. In these cases, I guess people just had to ask the librarian. Look at the incredible guidelines for title entries (references) in Cutter's Rules to try to make titles of books useful for the public (see p. 56+ in his rules https://archive.org/stream/rulesforadictio02cuttgoog#page/n62/mode/1up) and we can get another understanding what Cutter really meant when he wrote: To enable a person to find a book of which either ... the title is known. It was more complicated than it may appear since people rarely know the exact title of the book they want. In sum, his rules show that first-word entry is minimized in favor of catch-word or other titles. Much of this part of his rules disappeared later, probably because of their complexity. As an example, he says to make a first-word entry for works of prose fiction (Rule 135) giving the intriguing reason that novels are known more by their titles than by their authors' names. Even here he has an exception for the name of the hero or heroine in the title, citing the entry David Copperfield, Life and adventures of so that people didn't have to look for the book under L. Just wanted to share that bit. Still, there is no reason for a single 1xx field any longer. Too bad that wasn't dropped instead of the rule of three... -- 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] Consistency and 370 field
Hi Adam, In a message posted to RDA-L more than two weeks ago, you wrote: Even more strangely, at least one library is inputting the established forms of states, provinces, countries and adding a $2 naf even though RDA instructions in all of the instructions on recording these elements (e.g. 9.8.1.3, 9.9.1.3, 9.10.1.3, 9.11.1.3, 11.3.1.3, etc.) say to Abbreviate the names of countries, states, provinces, territories, etc., as instructed in Appendix B (B.11), as applicable. Isn't Place of Origin of the Work (370, subfield $g) an exception to the requirement of systematically using Appendix B abbreviations? 6.5.1.3 says: Record the place of origin of the work in the form prescribed in chapter 16. According to chapter 16, the name of a state, province, etc., would not be abbreviated unless it is used as a qualifier. Regards, Daniel Paradis Bibliothécaire Direction du traitement documentaire des collections patrimoniales Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec 2275, rue Holt Montréal (Québec) H2G 3H1 Téléphone : 514 873-1101, poste 3721 Télécopieur : 514 873-7296 daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca http://www.banq.qc.ca -Message d'origine- De : Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] De la part de Adam L. Schiff Envoyé : 22 septembre 2012 17:39 À : RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : [RDA-L] Consistency and 370 field I agree that it's a forlorn hope that everyone will be completely consistent, but it's good that everyone seems to agree that the data element is useful to record. Regards Richard Speaking of consistency, I am noticing lots of records input by many different libraries where the place name abbreviations from Appendix B.11 have not been followed when recording a location in the 370 field. I have seen things like: United States Connecticut Rhode Island New York New Zealand Disbury, Alberta Wellington, New Zealand Western Australia Saskatchewan, Canada [doubly incorrect, since Canada shouldn't be included] Alberta, Canada [just like the one above, both input by Uk] Even more strangely, at least one library is inputting the established forms of states, provinces, countries and adding a $2 naf even though RDA instructions in all of the instructions on recording these elements (e.g. 9.8.1.3, 9.9.1.3, 9.10.1.3, 9.11.1.3, 11.3.1.3, etc.) say to Abbreviate the names of countries, states, provinces, territories, etc., as instructed in Appendix B (B.11), as applicable. It's pretty easy to search the authority file in OCLC for incorrectly entered places, since you can search for example for New Zealand in the Entity Attributes index and then find the ones in 370 that are wrong. (And I fixed that country last night.) It would also sure be nice if OCLC searching allowed us to do more specific targeted searches in specific fields or elements, so you don't have to wade through records that have the words New Zealand in field 371 or 373 for example. Anyway, it would be really good to remind catalogers to use the abbreviations in B.11, even when recording just a state, province, or country. Adam ** * 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 * **
Re: [RDA-L] JSC, ISBD, and ISSN: harmonization discussions
On August 16, John Hostage wrote : Subject headings are a specialized area because they are so language dependent. The Bibliotheque nationale de France has developed RAMEAU (http://www.bnf.fr/en/professionals/anx_cataloging_indexing/a.subject_reference_systems.html http://www.bnf.fr/en/professionals/anx_cataloging_indexing/a.subject_reference_systems.html ), which I think was based on LCSH. RAMEAU was actually based on the Répertoire de vedettes-matière developed by Université Laval in Quebec and which is itself adapted in part from LCSH. Sources: http://rameau.bnf.fr/informations/convention.htm; https://rvmweb.bibl.ulaval.ca/a-propos. Daniel Paradis Bibliothécaire Direction du traitement documentaire des collections patrimoniales Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec 2275, rue Holt Montréal (Québec) H2G 3H1 Téléphone : 514 873-1101, poste 3721 Télécopieur : 514 873-7296 daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca http://www.banq.qc.ca http://www.banq.qc.ca/ From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] on behalf of Karen Coyle [li...@kcoyle.net] Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 19:18 To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] JSC, ISBD, and ISSN: harmonization discussions John, thanks for being our ears on the ground. I think that we have to be careful about how we define use ISBD, and I had trouble posing that question originally. I think the key question is whether people use the ISBD documentation AS THEIR CATALOGING RULES, or whether they have local catalong rules that are designed to be compatible with ISBD. I don't know if you would consider AACR2 and RDA to be conformant with ISBD (I don't know any of them well enough to make that determination.) My question was intended to be the former: that people actually catalog from the ISBD rules as issued by IFLA. Then we get into Ed's question: is that all? Or do they supplement ISBD with headings for authors and subjects, etc.? And I have yet another question, which is: have they developed a data format that represents ISBD for this purpose? (If so, I'd like to see it.) It does appear that the Finnish library works very closely to ISBD and I have sent them a few extra questions (and I should apologize for taking their time in the midst of IFLA!). Thanks again, kc On 8/15/12 1:32 PM, John Hostage wrote: Ed, I'm sorry, we didn't get into that question. The group is planning an international survey to find out who uses the ISBD, so I'll suggest that they include that question in the survey. John -- John Hostage Authorities and Database Integrity Librarian Langdell Hall Harvard Law School Library Cambridge, MA 02138 host...@law.harvard.edu mailto:host...@law.harvard.edu +(1)(617) 495-3974 (voice) +(1)(617) 496-4409 (fax) http://www.law.harvard.edu/library/ http://www.law.harvard.edu/library/ From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] on behalf of Ed Jones [ejo...@nu.edu] Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 15:46 To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] JSC, ISBD, and ISSN: harmonization discussions John If these countries use ISBD, they presumably use it in place of locally elaborated rules for bibliographic description (corresponding to AACR2 part 1). What do they do for choice and form of access points (corresponding to AACR2 part 2), where no comprehensive international standard exists? Ed Ed Jones Associate Director, Assessment and Technical Services National University Library 9393 Lightwave Avenue San Diego, California 92123-1447 +1 858 541 7920 (voice) +1 858 541 7997 (fax) http://national.academia.edu/EdJones From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of John Hostage Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 12:30 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] JSC, ISBD, and ISSN: harmonization discussions I'm at the IFLA conference in Helsinki, so I put this question to the ISBD Review Group. The responses indicated that the ISBD is used as the cataloging code here in Finland. See, for example, this report on the National Metadata Repository (http://www.nationallibrary.fi/libraries/projects/metadatarepository.html) under Subprojects. In Slovenia, the ISBD will be used for cataloging once a
Re: [RDA-L] Content terms as in the registry
The list of terms you cite doesn't include the following three terms (which
appear on the second page of the listing that you link to):
three-dimensional form [which covers realia]
three-dimensional moving image
two-dimensional moving image
Daniel Paradis
Service de catalogage
Universite de Montreal
Montreal, Quebec
Telephone: 514 343-6111, ext. 4019
Email: daniel.para...@umontreal.ca
http://www.bib.umontreal.ca
-Message d'origine-
De : Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:rd...@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] De la part de J. McRee Elrod
Envoyé : 13 septembre 2009 12:05
À : RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Objet : [RDA-L] Content terms as in the registry
For our use, we are realia; what would be the content of a replica
of the statue of David? An item of equipment with no computer program
or sound recording etc. installed? A naturally occuring object?
Fortunately we catalogue very little catographic material, we we will
not be affected by that too wordy list of terms. As usual, music
cataloguers have achieved a sensible, patron friendly, list of terms.
I suspect tactile three-dimensional form would mean nothing to most
patrons.
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__
http://metadataregistry.org/concept/list/vocabulary_id/45.html
336 Content
cartographic dataset
cartographic image
cartographic tactile image
cartographic tactile three-dimensional form
cartographic three-dimensional form
computer dataset
*
computer program
notated movement
notated music
performed music
[realia]
sounds
spoken word
still image
tactile image
tactile notated movement
tactile text
tactile three-dimensional form
text
*
Re: [RDA-L] Missing terms in RDA/MARC21 337-338
Spoken word is included in RDA as a term for content type (see instruction 6.10.1.3 in full draft). It would be recorded in field 336, though, not field 338 which is for carrier type. Daniel Paradis Service de catalogage Universite de Montreal Montreal, Quebec Telephone: 514 343-6111, ext. 4019 Email: daniel.para...@umontreal.ca http://www.bib.umontreal.ca -Message d'origine- De : Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:rd...@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] De la part de J. McRee Elrod Envoyé : 9 septembre 2009 18:54 À : RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Objet : [RDA-L] Missing terms in RDA/MARC21 337-338 Apoart from the need to change computer to electronic to agree with the ISBD Area ), isn't equipment needed in RDA/MARC21 337? What would one use for an MP3 player? Isn't spoken word needed in 338? What would one use for a talking book?
Re: [RDA-L] (Online) qualifier for series
It is my understanding that the AACR2 concept of “uniform title” has no direct equivalent in RDA. In AACR2, a uniform title includes not only the title that is used as the basis of the uniform title but also any addition made to it to make a heading unique (e.g., a date, a qualifier like “Online”) or any subdivision added to it to organize the file (e.g., language, “Vocal score,” “Selections”). In RDA, the authorized access point for a work or an expression includes the authorized access point for the entity responsible for the creation of the work when appropriate, the preferred title for the work and any other element required to uniquely identify the work or the expression (e.g., Form of work, Date of work, Content type, Language of expression). The title portion of such an access point, i.e. the combination of the preferred title and the added elements, does not have a specific name in RDA. Daniel Paradis Service de catalogage Pavillon Roger-Gaudry, local L-981 Universite de Montreal C.P. 6128, succursale Centre-ville Montreal QC H3C 3J7 Telephone: 514 343-6111, ext. 4019 Fax: 514 343-6402 Email: daniel.para...@umontreal.ca http://www.bib.umontreal.ca -Message d'origine- De : Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:rd...@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] De la part de Karen Coyle Envoyé : 22 juillet 2009 11:44 À : RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Objet : Re: [RDA-L] (Online) qualifier for series RDA doesn't define a uniform title, but instead (well, I think of it as instead) has title of the work. I think this will be an improvement, in part because every Work should have a title, whereas uniform titles were the exception rather than the rule. Oftentimes the title of the work will be the same as the title proper, which is associated with the manifestation. There doesn't, however, seem to be a specific title for the expression. Maybe someone here could clarify this for us. kc Jonathan Rochkind wrote: hal Cain wrote: Just what is the uniform title intended to do here? To serve as a one-line identifier for what's being catalogued; to provide a linking point for the work content; or to provide a linking point for the expression embodied? This is a really important point. In my reading of our history, the uniform title has traditionally been intended to do _several_ things, things that sometimes work at cross-purposes. Many of these things haven't really been specified, so much as they are tradition -- and in the current environment, often applied mechanistically without thinking about intent. We need to become clear on what uniform title is supposed to do -- and I believe, once we have that clarity, it will also be clear that uniform title alone can't do all the things it's been implicitly depended upon (or hoped for?) to do. We need instead one mechanism for collocating works, another for collocating expressions, another to serve as user-presentable display label (supporting doing this in multiple languages!), another to say what language an expression is in, and another to do... whatever it is that music catalogers do with uniform title (there are probably half a dozen different things just in music cataloging practice, none of which I understand!) Jonathan Until we have that clear (and RDA discussions have failed to make that clear to me -- perhaps on account of my inattention, but I can usually follow clear exposition) we'll go on making ad-hoc and conflicting decisions. FWIW I don't think the application of FRBR categories provides us with the tools to make the distinctions people are talking about here -- they're not subtle enough, at least not within the framework of the MARC21 bibliographic format. And the success will depend on the display created, a matter which RDA chose not to address, but crucial to the outcome. Hal Cain Dalton McCaughey Library Parkville, Victoria, Australia h...@dml.vic.edu.au -- --- Karen Coyle / Digital Library Consultant kco...@kcoyle.net http://www.kcoyle.net ph.: 510-540-7596 skype: kcoylenet fx.: 510-848-3913 mo.: 510-435-8234
Re: [RDA-L] (Online) qualifier for series
The “parts” making up a uniform title in AACR2 (e.g., basic title, additions, subdivisions) have been defined in RDA as separate elements (Preferred title for the work, Date of work, Other distinguishing characteristic of the work, Content type, Language of expression, etc.). In these conditions, I doubt that cataloguers could use the “Preferred title for the work” for other reasons than to name the work. Cataloguers will continue to be able to collocate and distinguish works and expressions, though, by combining these elements in authorized access points or as elements in work records. The other uses fulfilled by uniform titles in AACR2 will still be possible in RDA, without confusing the data model. Daniel Paradis Service de catalogage Pavillon Roger-Gaudry, local L-981 Universite de Montreal C.P. 6128, succursale Centre-ville Montreal QC H3C 3J7 Telephone: 514 343-6111, ext. 4019 Fax: 514 343-6402 Email: daniel.para...@umontreal.ca http://www.bib.umontreal.ca -Message d'origine- De : Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:rd...@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] De la part de Jonathan Rochkind Envoyé : 22 juillet 2009 11:45 À : RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Objet : Re: [RDA-L] (Online) qualifier for series But uniform title has been used for lots of things other than title of the work, exactly. Especially by music catalogers. Either those uses are going to be left un-filled by RDA or these catalogers are going to continue using the title of work to do things that aren't about naming the title of the work at all. Probably the latter. Which will just confuse things even more in our data model, not less. Jonathan
Re: [RDA-L] Uniform titles (was (Online) qualifier for series)
Mac said: It seems to me preferred title is the RDA core element which is most like uniform title in AACR2. Except that it applies only to distinctive uniform titles. What about classical music form uniform titles (the only 240s our clients like), and voluminous author form uniform titles such as Works which fewer like? Presumably preferred title takes care of Romeo and Juliet but not Works, Plays, Poems, etc. In music, the “preferred title” corresponds to the “initial title element” in AACR2, i.e. the basic title without additions. These additions (e.g. medium of performance, number, key) are treated as distinct elements in RDA. Compilations, as aggregate works, also have preferred titles in RDA. “Works” or “Plays” are examples of such titles. I can only hope preferred title will be in an authority record, not in individual bibliographic records, in most cases; particularly when identical to the title proper. The December 2008 draft of RDA includes the following text under instruction 6.0: Preferred access points [changed to “authorized access points” at the last JSC meeting] representing works and expressions can be used for different purposes. They provide the means for: ... b) identifying a work when the title by which it is known differs from the title proper of the resource being described Given that, in an implementation of RDA in current database structures, the preferred title for the work would appear in bibliographic records only as part of an access point (130, 1XX/240 or 7XX), I take this as an indication that in such an implementation, a 130 or 240 field would not be included in bibliographic records if it were identical to the 245. In a relational or object-oriented database structure with separate records for each of the Group 1 entities, I don’t see how work records could exist without a “Preferred title of the work.” Daniel Paradis Service de catalogage Pavillon Roger-Gaudry, local L-981 Universite de Montreal C.P. 6128, succursale Centre-ville Montreal QC H3C 3J7 Telephone: 514 343-6111, ext. 4019 Fax: 514 343-6402 Email: daniel.para...@umontreal.ca http://www.bib.umontreal.ca
Re: [RDA-L] RDA changes SLC intends to implement
About compilations of works by various creators, John Attig wrote this in his blog: It was confirmed that compilers are only considered to be creators in the case of compilation of factual information (e.g., bibliographies, dictionaries), but not in the case of compilations of aggregate works. In other words, there was no intention to change the AACR2 rules relating to collections, which will be entered under the preferred title. 6.27.1.4 will be revised to clarify this, as will the definitions of Compiler and Editor of Compilation in Appendix I. [line 644] Daniel Paradis Service de catalogage Universite de Montreal Montreal, Quebec Telephone: 514 343-6111, ext. 4019 Email: daniel.para...@umontreal.ca http://www.bib.umontreal.ca -Message d'origine- De : Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:rd...@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] De la part de J. McRee Elrod Envoyé : 2 juin 2009 15:24 À : RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Objet : [RDA-L] RDA changes SLC intends to implement MAJOR RDA CHANGES FROM AACR2 BY MARC FIELD 2 June 2009 These changes will not be adopted unless and until they begin appearing in derived national cataloguing agency records. 100 RDA change: Compilers of works by more than one author are again main entry, as they were prior to AACR2. 700 RDA change: A compiler of the works of more than one person is now 100 main entry. =
Re: [RDA-L] Accepting leadership
Mac seems to forget that place of publication was not mandatory in AACR2 either (see rule 1.0D1 First level of description). This didn't keep most libraries, including national agencies, from adopting a fuller level of description and including place of publication in their records. Daniel Paradis Service de catalogage Pavillon Roger-Gaudry, local L-981 Universite de Montreal C.P. 6128, succursale Centre-ville Montreal QC H3C 3J7 Telephone: 514 343-6111, ext. 4019 Fax: 514 343-6402 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.bib.umontreal.ca -Message d'origine- De : Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] De la part de J. McRee Elrod Envoyé : 12 novembre 2008 11:00 À : RDA-L@INFOSERV.NLC-BNC.CA Objet : [RDA-L] Accepting leadership Samuel said: RDA development implies exerting leadership and leadership being accepted in the field. There is some difficulty in accepting leadership which leads in the wrong direction, particularly the great number of optional provisions in RDA as last seen. A prime example is place of publication being optional. Just because some resources lack place of publication, e.g., many websites, should not mean that information should be optional for all resources. Some resources lack author, e.g., newpapers; should author then be optional for all items? Some resources lack title, e.g., collections without a collectiive title; should title be optional for all resources?
