subject:"\[RDA\-L\] Discussion lacuna"

[RDA-L] Discussion lacuna

2013-08-09 Thread J. McRee Elrod

It bothers me in our discussions concerning RDA usage, that most parse
the rules without reference to patron service.

No set of rules can every cover all eventualities.  In the absence of
a rule, e.g., how to record '61 as a date of production, the most
important consideration it seems to me should be what produces the
most helpful record?

How anyone would think 264  0 $c'61 is better for patrons than $c1761,
$c1861, or $c1961, with or without brackets, is beyond me.
  
In particular situations, for particular material, the rules may even
need bending a bit.


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

Re: [RDA-L] Discussion lacuna

2013-08-09 Thread Gene Fieg

I agree.  And that is why we don't follow pcc rules altogether.  For
instance, we will add the Translation of note, include pagination of
bibliographies if appropriate.  We do think that entries should be
justified in the description.  Why?  Because we have to realize that
cataloging uses very truncated, coded language for some of the entries.
Put the justifications in straightforward English informs the patron/user
more adequately, sometimes, than the formal language of our entries.

That is why I wish we could go back to the GMD; the 33X fields could be a
bit mystifying to users: text unmediated volume.  Maybe we have to have a
séance to get the to mediated ones


On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 2:13 PM, J. McRee Elrod m...@slc.bc.ca wrote:

 It bothers me in our discussions concerning RDA usage, that most parse
 the rules without reference to patron service.

 No set of rules can every cover all eventualities.  In the absence of
 a rule, e.g., how to record '61 as a date of production, the most
 important consideration it seems to me should be what produces the
 most helpful record?

 How anyone would think 264  0 $c'61 is better for patrons than $c1761,
 $c1861, or $c1961, with or without brackets, is beyond me.

 In particular situations, for particular material, the rules may even
 need bending a bit.


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




-- 
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] Discussion lacuna

2013-08-09 Thread Elizabeth O'Keefe

Or to the manifestations. As illustrated in this 19th-century engraving:

http://macabremuseum.com/collections-database/spirits-and-their-manifestations-an-evening-seance-engraving/

Liz O'Keefe

On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 5:38 PM, Gene Fieg gf...@cst.edu wrote:

I agree. And that is why we don't follow pcc rules altogether. For
instance, we will add the Translation of note, include pagination of
bibliographies if appropriate. We do think that entries should be
justified in the description. Why? Because we have to realize that
cataloging uses very truncated, coded language for some of the entries.
Put the justifications in straightforward English informs the patron/user
more adequately, sometimes, than the formal language of our entries.

That is why I wish we could go back to the GMD; the 33X fields could be a
bit mystifying to users: text unmediated volume. Maybe we have to have a
séance to get the to mediated ones

On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 2:13 PM, J. McRee Elrod m...@slc.bc.ca wrote:

It bothers me in our discussions concerning RDA usage, that most parse
the rules without reference to patron service.

No set of rules can every cover all eventualities. In the absence of
a rule, e.g., how to record '61 as a date of production, the most
important consideration it seems to me should be what produces the
most helpful record?

How anyone would think 264 0 $c'61 is better for patrons than $c1761,
$c1861, or $c1961, with or without brackets, is beyond me.

In particular situations, for particular material, the rules may even
need bending a bit.

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

--
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.

--
Elizabeth O'Keefe
Director of Collection Information Systems
The Morgan Library Museum
225 Madison Avenue
New York, NY 10016-3405

TEL: 212 590-0380
FAX: 2127685680
NET: eoke...@themorgan.org

Visit CORSAIR, the LibraryÃ°Ã°s comprehensive collections catalog:
http://corsair.themorgan.org

Re: [RDA-L] Discussion lacuna

2013-08-09 Thread Stewart, Richard

That is why I like to do RDA workshops in October. All those entities and
manifestations, and the occasional medium.

On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 5:01 PM, Elizabeth O'Keefe eoke...@themorgan.orgwrote: