I am in favor of making the Hebrew into a 400 field. This way the Hebrew form
will point to the Roman form that has been chosen. If you do it as a 100 field
the result will be that the Hebrew field will coexist but never point to the
Roman form. If so, why add it? The 100 parallel fields
NACO catalogers,
From CPSO, FYI.
--
FYI - CDS just announced that update 1 of 2007 is now available in PDF
format for downloading or printing off the CDS website here are the
relevant changes that NACO trainers need to aware of:
LCRI 2006, update 4:
24.4B - Revised to allow
Colleagues,
Caroline is correct that the policies and practices for applying non-roman
script at LC do vary by language/script to some extent.
She is also correct that the *general* principle applied in assigning Hebraic
script parallel fields for controlled access points (name headings, but
Daniel and colleagues,
I will inquire with CPSO regarding the timetable for developing the policies
and implementing non-roman data in authority records, to get some idea about
where the process will stand in June. In the meantime, I'll be happy to share
with the group any information I can
