Re: [RDA-L] recording on unnumbered plates

[Gene Fieg]

Just a question here.  Why did RDA get rid of the use brackets.  The use of
brackets made the statement of physicality clear: those pages or
plates were not explicitly numbered.  Why not continue using brackets for
the same purpose in RDA?



On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 7:03 PM, M. E.  wrote:


>  Sian Woolcock  wrote:
>
>
>>  We are currently having a discussion about recording the number of
>> unnumbered plates in the extent field (MARC 300). The RDA toolkit has us
>> confused on this.
>>
>>
>> **
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Previously under AACR2 rules, if we had a book with unnumbered plates we
>> would transcribe it like this:
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> *300 - - ‡a 202 p., [16] p. of plates : ‡b ill. ; ‡c 21 cm.*
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Under RDA rules we have now been transcribing books with unnumbered
>> plates like this
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> *300 - - ‡a 202 pages, 16 pages of plates : ‡b ill. ; ‡c 21 cm.*
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> We thought this was the right thing to do but upon closer inspection of
>> the RDA toolkit at rule 3.4.5.9 we are not sure if this is correct.
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> At the beginning of the rule it states:
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> *“**If the leaves or pages of plates in a resource are not included in
>> the numbering for a sequence or sequences of pages or leaves of text, etc.,
>> record the number of leaves or pages of plates at the end of the sequence
>> or sequences of pagination, etc. Record the number of leaves or pages of
>> plates after the pagination, etc., whether the plates are found together or
>> distributed throughout the resource.*
>>
>> * *
>>
>> * EXAMPLE*
>>
>> *246 pages, 32 pages of plates”*
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> However once you get to the end of the chapter it states
>>
>> * *
>>
>> *“**Exception*
>>
>> *Early printed resources. For early printed resources, if the leaves and
>> pages of plates are numbered, or if there are both numbered and unnumbered
>> plates, record each sequence of leaves and pages of plates in the
>> appropriate terms.*
>>
>> * *
>>
>> *EXAMPLE*
>>
>> *246 pages, 38 leaves of plates, 24 pages of plates*
>>
>> * *
>>
>> *Disregard unnumbered sequences of plates**,*”
>>
>> **
>>
>
>
> As Thomas mentioned, that's a continuation of the general instruction, not
> the early book instruction.  There's the prescribed "unnumbered" instead of
> brackets as well.
>
> I'll take this opportunity to point to a cock-up between the first half of
> 3.4.5.9 and the last half if comparing practices between RDA and AACR2 (and
> earlier).  The first half says to give a mention to plates found in the
> piece.  Good enough.  The back half, however, after the early printed
> resources section, tells us to only give unnumbered leaves/pages of plates
> when they are a substantial part of the piece or are mentioned in a
> note--just like for text (RDA 3.4.5.3.1).  So in a 300 page book we're not
> supposed to give "8 unnumbered leaves of plates"?  Or give it and add a
> note?
>
> I figure this stems from someone taking AACR2 2.5B3 and applying it under
> RDA both to texted pages/leaves and to plates, when I and I believe a
> majority of catalogers only applied that AACR2 rule to texted pages/leaves.
>
> If that's the way RDA's intended to be written--which would be a big
> change in practice judging from the large number of "plated" books that
> contain only a few plates--I'd welcome confirmation.
>
>>
> --
>
> Mark K. Ehlert
> Minitex
> 
>


-- 

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] recording on unnumbered plates

[M. E.]

Sian Woolcock  wrote:

>  We are currently having a discussion about recording the number of
> unnumbered plates in the extent field (MARC 300). The RDA toolkit has us
> confused on this.
>
> **
>
> ** **
>
> Previously under AACR2 rules, if we had a book with unnumbered plates we
> would transcribe it like this:
>
> ** **
>
> *300 - - ‡a 202 p., [16] p. of plates : ‡b ill. ; ‡c 21 cm.*
>
> ** **
>
> Under RDA rules we have now been transcribing books with unnumbered plates
> like this
>
> ** **
>
> *300 - - ‡a 202 pages, 16 pages of plates : ‡b ill. ; ‡c 21 cm.*
>
> ** **
>
> We thought this was the right thing to do but upon closer inspection of
> the RDA toolkit at rule 3.4.5.9 we are not sure if this is correct.
>
> ** **
>
> At the beginning of the rule it states:
>
> ** **
>
> *“**If the leaves or pages of plates in a resource are not included in
> the numbering for a sequence or sequences of pages or leaves of text, etc.,
> record the number of leaves or pages of plates at the end of the sequence
> or sequences of pagination, etc. Record the number of leaves or pages of
> plates after the pagination, etc., whether the plates are found together or
> distributed throughout the resource.*
>
> * *
>
> * EXAMPLE*
>
> *246 pages, 32 pages of plates”*
>
> ** **
>
> However once you get to the end of the chapter it states
>
> * *
>
> *“**Exception*
>
> *Early printed resources. For early printed resources, if the leaves and
> pages of plates are numbered, or if there are both numbered and unnumbered
> plates, record each sequence of leaves and pages of plates in the
> appropriate terms.*
>
> * *
>
> *EXAMPLE*
>
> *246 pages, 38 leaves of plates, 24 pages of plates*
>
> * *
>
> *Disregard unnumbered sequences of plates**,*”
>
> **
>


As Thomas mentioned, that's a continuation of the general instruction, not
the early book instruction.  There's the prescribed "unnumbered" instead of
brackets as well.

I'll take this opportunity to point to a cock-up between the first half of
3.4.5.9 and the last half if comparing practices between RDA and AACR2 (and
earlier).  The first half says to give a mention to plates found in the
piece.  Good enough.  The back half, however, after the early printed
resources section, tells us to only give unnumbered leaves/pages of plates
when they are a substantial part of the piece or are mentioned in a
note--just like for text (RDA 3.4.5.3.1).  So in a 300 page book we're not
supposed to give "8 unnumbered leaves of plates"?  Or give it and add a
note?

I figure this stems from someone taking AACR2 2.5B3 and applying it under
RDA both to texted pages/leaves and to plates, when I and I believe a
majority of catalogers only applied that AACR2 rule to texted pages/leaves.

If that's the way RDA's intended to be written--which would be a big change
in practice judging from the large number of "plated" books that contain
only a few plates--I'd welcome confirmation.

>
-- 
Mark K. Ehlert
Minitex

Re: [RDA-L] recording on unnumbered plates

[J. McRee Elrod]

Sian Woolcock posted:

>300 - - ‡a 202 pages, 16 pages of plates : ‡b ill. ; ‡c 21 cm.

I would suggest you stop agonizing over what RDA says, and record the
data your patrons would find useful.  You can't be faulted for
exceeding core requirements.

Attempting to following the exact wording of RDA can result in
strangeness  I doubt even JSC intended, e.g., banning "illustrations"
from :$b if the "illustrations" are the prime content.

In particular, I would ignore any wording which seems to indicate
helpful data should be omitted.  Unnumbered plates should particularly
not be ignored for early printed materials.  Fortunately I suspect
many will be following rare book cataloguing rules as opposed to RDA
for such materials.

>"Disregard unnumbered sequences of plates,"

This clearly contradicts directions you quoted both for current and
early printed materials. The difference (unneeded IMNSHO) is that
modern works have unnumbered plates given after pagination, and early
printed works have them given in the order they occur.  Seems to me
recording in the order found would be best in all situations.

RDA could have used some time on Michael Gorman's desk!


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

Re: [RDA-L] recording on unnumbered plates

[Brenndorfer, Thomas]

From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Sian Woolcock 
[sian.woolc...@adelaide.edu.au]
Sent: August-20-13 8:45 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: [RDA-L] recording on unnumbered plates



>However once you get to the end of the chapter it states

>“Exception
>Early printed resources. For early printed resources, if the leaves and pages 
>of plates are numbered, or if there are both numbered and >unnumbered plates, 
>record each sequence of leaves and pages of plates in the appropriate terms.

>EXAMPLE
>246 pages, 38 leaves of plates, 24 pages of plates

>Disregard unnumbered sequences of plates,”


>So my question is, are we disregarding all unnumbered sequences of plates or 
>just ones in Early printed resources? Toolkit is a bit >unclear.





"Disregard unnumbered sequences of plates" begins a new part of the 
instruction. In the cases you do include unnumbered sequences of plates one 
also has to use the word "unnumbered", as in the RDA examples:

... 43 unnumbered leaves of plates

... 19 unnumbered pages of plates

The use of qualifier "unnumbered" is also covered in RDA 3.4.5.8.


Thomas Brenndorfer
Guelph Public Library