Jonathan Rochkind said:
Won't it have an alternate 'access point' for the other nation(s)
too, and thus be findable at either alphabetical location regardless
of which nation comes first in the given translation?
One hopes. But main entry determines Cutter, thus place on the shelf;
as well as
Hal Cain answered Jonathan Rochind concerning why reference
librarians might care about entry:
Because main entry usually determines the call number within a
classification sequence?
The other half of the question was why they should care about
justification of added entries. I think a patron
Amen!! I agree, but I don't know if this will go to the discussion list.
I'm probably not allowed to post anything.
Maxine Sherman
Cataloger
Cuyahoga County Public Library
Administrative Offices
2111 Snow Road / Parma, OH 44134-2728
p 216.749.9378 / f 216.749.9445
msher...@cuyahogalibrary.org
One of the clever RDA test music cataloguers noticed that 260
$c is repeating, so:
260 $c [2003], c2003
Those clever music cataloguers! That makes much more sense than the
complicated solutions before MARBI.
The copyright sign or c would be enough to distinguish one from the
other.
__
Sorry! I sent the wrong example. To quote from the MLA report:
One of the testers tried repeating $c so that the publication date
and copyright date are in different subfields. 260 $c is repeatable in
the MARC format ...
260 $c [1966], $c c1966.
In the example the c is the copyright sign, but
At 03:55 PM 6/3/2011, J. McRee Elrod wrote:
Sorry! I sent the wrong example. To quote from the MLA report:
One of the testers tried repeating $c so that the publication date
and copyright date are in different subfields. 260 $c is repeatable in
the MARC format ...
Yes, but: Multiple
And then there are the examples of adjacent 260 $c's in the sample RDA
records found here:
http://www.rda-jsc.org/docs/6JSC_RDA_Complete_Examples_ALA_Rep_addendum.pdf
--
Mark K. Ehlert Minitex
Coordinator University of Minnesota
Bibliographic Technical
One of the testers tried repeating $c so that the publication date
and copyright date are in different subfields. 260 $c is repeatable in
the MARC format ...
Yes, but: Multiple adjacent publication dates such as a date of
publication and copyright date are recorded in a single subfield $c.
Yes,
At 06:24 PM 6/3/2011, J. McRee Elrod wrote:
One of the testers tried repeating $c so that the publication date
and copyright date are in different subfields. 260 $c is repeatable in
the MARC format ...
Yes, but: Multiple adjacent publication dates such as a date of
publication and copyright
9 matches
Mail list logo
