Re: [RDA-L] question about a Bible heading - correction
Actually, before going to the [rules] list I should bring it up with John A. Kathy first. But first let me know if it’s something you’d be willing to take on or if we need to find someone else to spearhead it. Peter
[RDA-L] APOLOGY - RE: [RDA-L] question about a Bible heading - correction
My apologies to the list. This was meant to be a private message to Robert Rendall, discussing whether or not CC:DA will take up the issue of the Apocrypha. I had several e-mails up and replied to the wrong one. Peter From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Rolla, Peter Sent: Monday, April 01, 2013 3:53 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] question about a Bible heading - correction Actually, before going to the [rules] list I should bring it up with John A. Kathy first. But first let me know if it’s something you’d be willing to take on or if we need to find someone else to spearhead it. Peter
Re: [RDA-L] question about a Bible heading
Ione, coincidentally, I have been struggling with the exact same question, and I followed the same path that you have followed. I would also be grateful to hear what others are doing. My personal take on the situation: As I read it, RDA allows 3 collective subdivisions of the Bible: Bible. Old Testament Bible. Apocrypha (limited to the list given in 6.23.2.9.4) Bible. New Testament Since the other apocryphal books are considered extra-canonical, I think the RDA viewpoint is that it is not appropriate to provide some other collective subdivision for them following the title Bible. That basically leaves us with no option for providing a collective title access point for a compilation of extra-canonical apocryphal books. RDA's approach, I think, would be to treat the title on your resource as the preferred title for the compilation (in MARC terms, just a 245 with no 130), then provide added access points for the individual apocryphal books contained in the compilation. This is the approach I am following at the moment, until something better comes along or the instructions are modified. I don't think the LC-PCC PS for 6.2.2.9.2 was written with the needs of theological librarians in mind, and I think that in this special case there is justification for disregarding the PS. Instead, we could follow RDA's original instruction in 6.2.2.9.2 and record the preferred title for each of the parts -- as an added access point, i.e. 730. Of course, if it's a big compilation containing a long list of books, this may not be an attractive option. We still have the subject heading Apocryphal books (New Testament) as an access point that would pull various compilations together, though the formulation of this heading may be open to question if we follow the logic above about extra-canonical books. There may be a need here to propose a change to the instructions. I'd be interested in hearing from others who have lots of Bible-related headings to deal with. http://access.rdatoolkit.org/document.php?id=rdachp6target=rda6-2596#rda6-2596 Charles Croissant Senior Catalog Librarian Pius XII Memorial Library Saint Louis University St. Louis, MO 63108 On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 12:42 PM, Ione Damasco idamas...@udayton.eduwrote: Hello everyone, I have a question about how to properly formulate a particular Bible heading, that I don't think will be covered by the Phase 2 changes. I have a record for an older book, and it has the following main entry, which is now no longer valid under RDA: 130 0 _ Bible. $p N.T. $p Apocryphal books. $l Italian There is also a 650 0 0 Apocryphal books (New Testament) $x Criticism, interpretation, etc. This is what I have found in RDA (I apologize for the profusion of cutting and pasting): *RDA 6.23.2.9.4 Apocrypha* *Record Apocrypha as a subdivision of the preferred title for the Bible for the compilation known as the Apocrypha (1–2 Esdras, Tobit, Judith, Rest of Esther, Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, History of Susanna, Song of the Three Children, Bel and the Dragon, Prayer of Manasses, 1–2 Maccabees).* The work is not dealing with these books; therefore, this instruction does not apply, but it tells me to look at the following instruction: *For apocryphal books, see 6.23.2.6http://access.rdatoolkit.org/document.php?id=rdachp6target=rda6-5421#rda6-5421 .* RDA 6.23.2.6 says: *An apocryphal book is one that is not included in the Catholic canon nor in the Protestant Apocrypha. Choose as the preferred title for an apocryphal book the title commonly found in sources in a language preferred by the agency creating the data.* * * * * * * *EXAMPLE* *Book of Jubilees* *Epistola Apostolorum* *Gospel according to the Hebrews* * * * * * * *For compilations of apocryphal books, apply the instructions at 6.2.2.9.2http://access.rdatoolkit.org/document.php?id=rdachp6target=rda6-2556#rda6-2556 .* 6.2.2.9.2 Two or More Parts http://access.rdatoolkit.org/document.php?id=lcpschp6target=lcps6-315#lcps6-315 Alternative http://access.rdatoolkit.org/document.php?id=lcpschp6target=lcps6-323#lcps6-323 When identifying two or more unnumbered or non-consecutively numbered parts of a work, identify the parts collectively. Record the conventional collective title Selections as the preferred title for the parts. Apply this instruction instead of or in addition to recording the preferred title for each of the parts. EXAMPLE Selections Preferred title for the parts of the work in a compilation comprising books 1 and 6 of Homer’s Iliad Selections Preferred title for the parts of the work in a compilation comprising four episodes of the television program The Simpsons originally broadcast between 1990 and 2001 But I am confused by the instructions at this point--and my library follows the LC-PCC PS for instructions, which in this case tells me to: LC-PCC PS for
Re: [RDA-L] question about a Bible heading
The instruction in 6.23.2.6 that says, For compilations of apocryphal books, apply the instructions at 6.2.2.9.2 is clearly a mistake, since, as Charles says, these apocryphal books are not considered to be parts of the Bible or any other larger work. A simple correction of this to apply the instructions at 6.27.1.4 was included in a larger revision proposal prepared by the American Theological Library Association and presented at ALA's Midwinter Meeting in January 2012 (see page 4): http://www.libraries.psu.edu/tas/jca/ccda/docs/atla2011-1.pdf ATLA was asked to revise the larger proposal and work on that is not yet complete, but the proposal itself says this particular correction could be handled as a fast-track change; this discussion here may serve as a helpful reminder of that. Robert Rendall On 3/28/2013 3:40 PM, Charles Croissant wrote: Ione, coincidentally, I have been struggling with the exact same question, and I followed the same path that you have followed. I would also be grateful to hear what others are doing. My personal take on the situation: As I read it, RDA allows 3 collective subdivisions of the Bible: Bible. Old Testament Bible. Apocrypha (limited to the list given in 6.23.2.9.4) Bible. New Testament Since the other apocryphal books are considered extra-canonical, I think the RDA viewpoint is that it is not appropriate to provide some other collective subdivision for them following the title Bible. That basically leaves us with no option for providing a collective title access point for a compilation of extra-canonical apocryphal books. RDA's approach, I think, would be to treat the title on your resource as the preferred title for the compilation (in MARC terms, just a 245 with no 130), then provide added access points for the individual apocryphal books contained in the compilation. This is the approach I am following at the moment, until something better comes along or the instructions are modified. I don't think the LC-PCC PS for 6.2.2.9.2 was written with the needs of theological librarians in mind, and I think that in this special case there is justification for disregarding the PS. Instead, we could follow RDA's original instruction in 6.2.2.9.2 and record the preferred title for each of the parts -- as an added access point, i.e. 730. Of course, if it's a big compilation containing a long list of books, this may not be an attractive option. We still have the subject heading Apocryphal books (New Testament) as an access point that would pull various compilations together, though the formulation of this heading may be open to question if we follow the logic above about extra-canonical books. There may be a need here to propose a change to the instructions. I'd be interested in hearing from others who have lots of Bible-related headings to deal with. Charles Croissant Senior Catalog Librarian Pius XII Memorial Library Saint Louis University St. Louis, MO 63108 On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 12:42 PM, Ione Damasco idamas...@udayton.edu mailto:idamas...@udayton.edu wrote: Hello everyone, I have a question about how to properly formulate a particular Bible heading, that I don't think will be covered by the Phase 2 changes. I have a record for an older book, and it has the following main entry, which is now no longer valid under RDA: 130 0 _ Bible. $p N.T. $p Apocryphal books. $l Italian There is also a 650 0 0 Apocryphal books (New Testament) $x Criticism, interpretation, etc. This is what I have found in RDA (I apologize for the profusion of cutting and pasting): *RDA 6.23.2.9.4 Apocrypha* *Record Apocrypha as a subdivision of the preferred title for the Bible for the compilation known as the Apocrypha (1–2 Esdras, Tobit, Judith, Rest of Esther, Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, History of Susanna, Song of the Three Children, Bel and the Dragon, Prayer of Manasses, 1–2 Maccabees).* The work is not dealing with these books; therefore, this instruction does not apply, but it tells me to look at the following instruction: *For apocryphal books, see 6.23.2.6 http://access.rdatoolkit.org/document.php?id=rdachp6target=rda6-5421#rda6-5421.* RDA 6.23.2.6 says: *An apocryphal book is one that is not included in the Catholic canon nor in the Protestant Apocrypha. Choose as the preferred title for an apocryphal book the title commonly found in sources in a language preferred by the agency creating the data.* ** ** ** *EXAMPLE* *Book of Jubilees* *Epistola Apostolorum* *Gospel according to the Hebrews* ** ** ** *For compilations of apocryphal books, apply the instructions at 6.2.2.9.2 http://access.rdatoolkit.org/document.php?id=rdachp6target=rda6-2556#rda6-2556.* 6.2.2.9.2 Twoor More Parts
Re: [RDA-L] question about a Bible heading
Basically, we have the use of one term here to cover two different things: books that are canonical in the Catholic canon and the same term for those that are excluded from the Jewish, Protestant, and Catholic canons. Another term used for the latter is: Pseudepigrapha. On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Robert Rendall rr2...@columbia.edu wrote: ** The instruction in 6.23.2.6 that says, For compilations of apocryphal books, apply the instructions at 6.2.2.9.2 is clearly a mistake, since, as Charles says, these apocryphal books are not considered to be parts of the Bible or any other larger work. A simple correction of this to apply the instructions at 6.27.1.4 was included in a larger revision proposal prepared by the American Theological Library Association and presented at ALA's Midwinter Meeting in January 2012 (see page 4): http://www.libraries.psu.edu/tas/jca/ccda/docs/atla2011-1.pdf ATLA was asked to revise the larger proposal and work on that is not yet complete, but the proposal itself says this particular correction could be handled as a fast-track change; this discussion here may serve as a helpful reminder of that. Robert Rendall On 3/28/2013 3:40 PM, Charles Croissant wrote: Ione, coincidentally, I have been struggling with the exact same question, and I followed the same path that you have followed. I would also be grateful to hear what others are doing. My personal take on the situation: As I read it, RDA allows 3 collective subdivisions of the Bible: Bible. Old Testament Bible. Apocrypha (limited to the list given in 6.23.2.9.4) Bible. New Testament Since the other apocryphal books are considered extra-canonical, I think the RDA viewpoint is that it is not appropriate to provide some other collective subdivision for them following the title Bible. That basically leaves us with no option for providing a collective title access point for a compilation of extra-canonical apocryphal books. RDA's approach, I think, would be to treat the title on your resource as the preferred title for the compilation (in MARC terms, just a 245 with no 130), then provide added access points for the individual apocryphal books contained in the compilation. This is the approach I am following at the moment, until something better comes along or the instructions are modified. I don't think the LC-PCC PS for 6.2.2.9.2 was written with the needs of theological librarians in mind, and I think that in this special case there is justification for disregarding the PS. Instead, we could follow RDA's original instruction in 6.2.2.9.2 and record the preferred title for each of the parts -- as an added access point, i.e. 730. Of course, if it's a big compilation containing a long list of books, this may not be an attractive option. We still have the subject heading Apocryphal books (New Testament) as an access point that would pull various compilations together, though the formulation of this heading may be open to question if we follow the logic above about extra-canonical books. There may be a need here to propose a change to the instructions. I'd be interested in hearing from others who have lots of Bible-related headings to deal with. Charles Croissant Senior Catalog Librarian Pius XII Memorial Library Saint Louis University St. Louis, MO 63108 On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 12:42 PM, Ione Damasco idamas...@udayton.eduwrote: Hello everyone, I have a question about how to properly formulate a particular Bible heading, that I don't think will be covered by the Phase 2 changes. I have a record for an older book, and it has the following main entry, which is now no longer valid under RDA: 130 0 _ Bible. $p N.T. $p Apocryphal books. $l Italian There is also a 650 0 0 Apocryphal books (New Testament) $x Criticism, interpretation, etc. This is what I have found in RDA (I apologize for the profusion of cutting and pasting): *RDA 6.23.2.9.4 Apocrypha* *Record Apocrypha as a subdivision of the preferred title for the Bible for the compilation known as the Apocrypha (1–2 Esdras, Tobit, Judith, Rest of Esther, Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, History of Susanna, Song of the Three Children, Bel and the Dragon, Prayer of Manasses, 1–2 Maccabees).* The work is not dealing with these books; therefore, this instruction does not apply, but it tells me to look at the following instruction: *For apocryphal books, see 6.23.2.6http://access.rdatoolkit.org/document.php?id=rdachp6target=rda6-5421#rda6-5421 .* RDA 6.23.2.6 says: *An apocryphal book is one that is not included in the Catholic canon nor in the Protestant Apocrypha. Choose as the preferred title for an apocryphal book the title commonly found in sources in a language preferred by the agency creating the data.* * * * * * * *EXAMPLE* *Book of Jubilees* *Epistola Apostolorum* *Gospel according to the Hebrews* * * * * * * *For compilations of
